Avatar
FunkCoffee
de7623f81c44e52697dd7b9ffa6183b333c3ea9111306213db147a0f0d9b7c4e
Building community hubs and shilling low time preference coffee in Vancouver, BC.

There’s still a lot of situations where not having a mediator might make commerce, think overseas vendors etc.

Don’t get me wrong I hate rent seekers like visa/mastercard and they need to go, but their networks actually minimize trust required with unknown vendors.

Immutable payments has trade-offs.

Having dispute moderating intermediaries is probably inevitable in many ways, it is a valuable service and does deserve a financial reward.

If your uber driver drops you off in the middle of nowhere or your airbnb guest trashes your place, these disputes have to be moderated somehow.

I think at some point there will be bitcoin payment escrows to facilitate commerce and we will likely pay for that service.

Strategic grift reserve

Canada’s selling off all of its gold in 2016 is pretty glaring, at the very least we consistently run a trade surplus which backs our economy, but one can’t help think of the long term ramifications and that we sold the bottom here.

GN

The Bear is the best series on TV right now.

Hi folks we've been experiencing some disruptions over the past couple days as we've been working to mitigate against an attacker who found and exploited a vulnerability in our system that allowed them to get password reset codes for accounts that didn't belong to them.

Using this exploit they were able to gain access to a number of accounts that they shouldn't have had access to and withdraw funds.

We've patched the issue and believe we've revoked the attacker's access to the compromised accounts by invalidating their JWT authentication tokens and NWC secrets.

We've instituted system-wide withdrawal limits as a precautionary measure while we work to fully restore and migrate the payment records of affected accounts.

If you are seeing a blank screen when you visit the Coinos site, you may need to visit https://coinos.io/logout or clear your browser cache. If you have Coinos installed as a PWA you may need to uninstall it and re-add it to your homescreen.

About 80 accounts had their passwords reset by the attacker but only a handful were actively stolen from. If your account was compromised you may be missing some recent transactions. We do have backups and will be writing scripts to find and restore those payment records over the coming days.

If you were using Coinos via NWC your NWC connection string secret may have changed in which case you will need to re-connect Coinos to your Nostr apps.

We'll be reverting unsolicited withdrawals and covering all losses ourselves to make all our users whole. Thankfully we caught the attack relatively quickly and managed to take corrective action before the attacker had time to fully drain our wallets.

Coinos is essentially a volunteer effort and one-man show on the tech front so please be patient as it's going to take me a few days to restore everything back to normal.

This incident has not shaken my resolve, only strengthened it.

Sincerely,

Adam Soltys

Cheers to the transparency, and thank you for the work that you do.

To those who don’t know, Coinos does have a self custody option to be able to pull down your sats on-chain which should be resistant to these kind of attack.

Yep, they’ve constantly been adding new features, ecash, NWC, self custody.

We use it for our POS at the cafe and it’s easily the best option out there.

Replying to Avatar Guy Swann

So what’s all the hoopla about DeepSeek and why is it breaking everybody’s brain right now in Ai?

I’ve been doing a dive for a couple of days and these are the main deets I’ve pulled together, will have a Guy’s Take on it soon, so stay tuned to the nostr:npub1hw4zdmnygyvyypgztfxn8aqqmenxtwdf3tuwrd44stjjeckpc37q6zlg0q feed

DeepSeek ELI5:

• US has been hailed as the leader in Ai, while pushing fears that we need to be closed and not share with China cuz evil CCP and they can’t figure it out without us

• ChatGPT and “Open”Ai is poster child, eating up retarded amounts of capital for training and inference (using) LLMs. Estimates say around $100 million or more for ChatGPT o1 model.

• In just a couple of weeks China drops numerous open source models with incredible results, Hunyuan for video, Minimax, and now DeepSeek. All open source, all insanely competitive with the premiere closed source in the US.

• DeepSeek actually surpassed ChatGPT o1 on most benchmarks, particularly math, logic, and coding.

• DeepSeek is also totally open with how its thought process works, it explains and shows its work as it runs, while ChatGPT makes that proprietary. This makes building with, troubleshooting, and understanding with DeepSeek much better.

• DeepSeek is also multimodal, so you can give it PDFs, images, connect it to the internet, etc. it’s a literal full personal assistant with just a few tools to plug into it.

• The API costs 95% LESS than ChatGPT API per call. They claim that is a profitable price as well, while OpenAi is bleeding money.

• They state that DeepSeek cost only $5.6 million to train and operate.

• Capital controls on GPUs and chips went into effect in the past year or two trying to prevent China from “catching up,” and it seems to have failed miserably. As it seems China was able to do 20x the results per dollar with inferior hardware.

• The US model of Ai, its costs, its capes structure, and the massive demand for chips has been the model for assessing the valuation, pricing, and future demand of the entire Ai industry. DeepSeek just took a giant dump on all of it by out performing and spending a tiny fraction to achieve it while also dealing with lack of access to the newest chips.

All of this together is why people are freaking out about a plummet to Nvidia price, reevaluation of OpenAi, and the failure of US to stay dominant or even the legitimacy of staying proprietary as it may just cause us to fall behind rather than lead. All after a $700 billion investment was just announced that now just kinda looks like incompetent corporations wasting horrendous amounts of money for something they won’t even share with people, that you can’t run locally, and is surpassed by a few lean Chinese startups with barely a few million.

Even though it’s China, it feels bullish for open-source AI and by proxy, decentralization and humanity.

Replying to Avatar Bitcoin Mechanic

So we're regularly noticing how unacceptably large Foundry has gotten and it would be good if Bitcoiners in general understand why we are where we are.

First, let's talk about what it is pools actually do, starting from the theoretical going all the way the practical.

In theory they make no difference to anything - they simply reduce variance.

Instead of earning $.X per year, you earn $.X/365 per day.

This is far more consistent and makes day to day operations easier and it's clear why someone would want to do this - assuming they're a smaller miner who is not capable of finding block frequently enough without pooling and splitting rewards with others.

This might be desirable to the point where you'd even pay a split to the coordinator (pool) because it's that valuable of a service.

To take it further, the absolute hands-down most common payout model for a pool to use is FPPS - this doubles down on the supposed benefit that is so compelling here. It stands for Full Pay Pay Share which -in theory - means that miners get paid on a share to share basis (something they're submitting multiple times a minute) a highly predictable amount.

This means you not only have you abandoned dealing with lotto-variance (waiting until you find a block) or even standard pool variance (waiting until someone on the pool finds a block) but instead you're mining with a pool that grants you earnings multiple times per minute regardless of if the pool is finding any blocks or not.

This is variance reduction to such an extreme that the product becomes unbelievably expensive because pools have now put themselves in a position where they must pay miners for blocks that might - and very often don't - happen.

This was demonstrated beyond doubt when OCEAN (non-FPPS) released its numbers and they outperformed FPPS by over 30% in some cases during its first year of operation.

*Note: This is NOT a "You should mine on OCEAN" post. I am simply trying to explain why miners are making the decisions they are because it seems to be eluding almost everyone.

So miners are apparently opting for variance reduction to the point where they want to get paid no matter what for blocks that may or may not even exist with resolution all the way down to the share level.

But here's the part where the disconnect between theory and reality comes in.

Nearly all the miners on Foundry have absolutely zero need for this kind of variance reduction - or indeed any at all.

The publicly traded miners that make use of Foundry all have the ability to find multiple blocks a day without any third party whatsoever which is way more than enough.

As mentioned already, FPPS is an extremely expensive product that logically would only be required by a miner faced with 24 hourly energy bills who only has 100 Petahash or so. Again, the typical Foundry miner is 100 times the size of this coming in at almost 10 Exahash at the smaller end.

So if Foundry solves a particular issue - variance - and charges a fortune to do it, and its main customer is miners that could lotto-mine and find multiple blocks a day without incurring the costs of FPPS then what on Earth are they doing?

The naive answer is that they haven't done the maths. In some cases I actually know this to be true. You're an enormous miner and you do a deal with Foundry - they charge you 0.1% fee and you think that's equivalent to if you cut out the middle man entirely pretty much so it becomes worth it.

But with FPPS the fee is never the fee. That is the airport currency exchange sign that says "0% COMMISSION" and gives you something about 14% worse than market rate. Where is the money going?

I don't think most miners are actually making that mistake, at least not all of them.

It's time to explain the real reason here.

Compliance by proxy.

And this is what's key to understand.

History: Once upon a time a pool called GHash(.)io got above 40% of the hashrate (which Foundry is doing repeatedly at this point) and the miners all fled out of instinct to protect the network. You simply cannot have any single entity making 50% of the blocks that get added to the chain or anything approaching that.

So why aren't miners doing it today? Are they that addicted to variance reduction when the calibre of miner that uses Foundry is perfectly capable of reducing their own variance anyway even though it's costing them a fortune?

Again the entire space needs to understand why history will not be repeating itself here and this where I find the greatest amount of self-delusion and dishonesty in this space.

Compliance by proxy was not a thing in 2016. At least not for miners.

Since then, someone has come along and turned what is completely unacceptable to the powers that be - Bitcoin mining - and turned it into a completely sanitized, censorship prone shell of its former self - and *that* is the true motivation for "miners" paying these exorbitant fees.

Compliance is new. And it isn't a factor people are taking into consideration.

Whenever we point out how precarious the situation has become, there is the typical response - "If Foundry ever do then their miners will just leave".

It's time to put this cope-strategy to bed.

If a miner is perfectly capable of reducing their own variance to the tune of reliably finding multiple blocks per day themselves - why are they using a pool at all? Especially if that pool costs a fortune?

Or more crudely - If losing a tonne of money for no apparent reason isn't compelling enough to leave Foundry, then jeopardizing Bitcoin isn't going to be either.

The true motivation is all that matters, and its overwhelmingly just compliance. "Miners" of substantial size increasingly do not want anything to do with Bitcoin and want all their hashrate transformed from raw Bitcoins coming fresh out of the blockchain into a nice clean product that their accountants and lawyers can tolerate regardless of the cost.

To take the counter position to my argument here, there are of course costs to rough-housing it and grappling with Bitcoin directly as MARA does and I don't want to pretend otherwise but I don't think they come anything like close to justifying the enormity of the revenue lost due to the extreme over-kill that is FPPS.

This is the only area in which I will take pushback from someone in one of the relevant companies as it's possible I am just wrong.

The following companies - BitFarms, Hut8, RIOT, WULF, HIVE, Cleanspark and a couple of handfuls of others are all - to the best of my knowledge - paying a fortune for the combined benefit of variance reduction (which they absolutely have no need of) and compliance by proxy.

If anyone from any of those companies can explain to me why I am wrong and that if/when Foundry's size results in them engaging in censorship or any other abuse of the network (heck, already requiring KYC and regular inspections of mining facilities is unacceptable and that's already been the case for Foundry miners for years) then why should anyone believe you would move to another pool or go the Mara route?

At present I believe that Foundry could continue its inexorable ascent to the 51% magic number we're all afraid of and the new cope will be "Well they haven't done yet" and we'll just keep moving the goal posts about what constitutes a bad thing.

At the moment "It's just KYC", "It's just mandatory inspections" and "It's just lost revenue."

All of that is unacceptable. "It's just transactions associated with Russia/Iran" comes next and the shareholders of publicly traded Bitcoin miners are unlikely to view censorship based on that criteria as being anything to worry about. "Why do you hate America??"

The old cope of "another miner will just include them and their business will survive while the censoring miners die" is complete and utter delusion.

Almost 100% of revenue from the chain is subsidy. Transaction fees are neither here nor there. And if we think the US Pubcos are all going to voluntarily go admit bankruptcy because they lost a few hundred bucks a week from mining blocks that censored blacklisted UTXOs then we are deluding ourselves.

I reiterate - miners are with Foundry because compliance is increasingly all that matters. This has resulted in enormous centralization of template construction that becomes a genuine attack vector at ~30% and has been consistently way above that for a long time now. 51% is a meme, and imo not a powerful enough one to inspire change if it actually comes to that. The frogs are already boiling and no one cares.

Let's be honest. None of the miners on Foundry are leaving any time soon but the variance reducing product they offer that can be so trivially replicated elsewhere is not why any of them are doing what they are doing.

Foundry is the sole occupant within the regulatory moat that is Bitcoin mining in America and I don't see that as trivial to replicate at all.

And the reason I wish to sound the alarm 10,000 louder than I have been before this point is that the current US administration has run a campaign that specifically talks about centralizing Bitcoin in the US.

The phrase "We will make all the Bitcoins in America" is exactly the worst possible thing you could want to hear given everything I've talked about in this post and not only is it not being rejected by Bitcoiners, it is being celebrated as a good thing.

Thanks for the awareness. Sounds like a pretty unacceptable trade off.

Will protest by selling my HUT/Cleanspark/BITF shares until this is rectified!

🙏

Great take.

I think another issue I took with her is that everyone she speaks about is a bad actor rather than (mostly) good actors working within broken incentives.

This deepens the hopelessness she spreads.

Replying to Avatar ov8

Part way through setting up my new nostr:npub12ctjk5lhxp6sks8x83gpk9sx3hvk5fz70uz4ze6uplkfs9lwjmsq2rc5ky #mk4 #coldwallet via nostr:npub1rxysxnjkhrmqd3ey73dp9n5y5yvyzcs64acc9g0k2epcpwwyya4spvhnp8 tutorial. While going through nostr:npub17cyatz6z2dzcw6xehtcm9z45m76lde5smxdmyasvs00r4pqv863qrs4ml3's pre-release limited edition workbook!

Didn’t realize I needed an SD card 🤦🏻‍♀️

Kudos to #BTCALLCAPS for being on standby.

You don’t technically need an SD card if you use NFC with Nunchuk wallet on your phone.

Ladies and gentlemen, your financial system:

We don’t “already use digital money”.

We use a spaghetti mess of antiquated systems duct-taped together of each other protected by monopolies and regulatory capture.

Bank drafts in Canada provide zero advantage to a personal cheque and are subject to the same hold time (5

business days)

Domestic wires take about 2-3 business days.

There is no way for an individual to transfer large amounts of funds (~$20,000+) without two days settlement.

In twenty twenty fucking five……

This is what we’re competing against 😂

I actually expected to be able to buy cheap sats in this scenario but I guess not.

I’m generally opposed to severe non-violent prison time, but it seems like consensus is that Ross’ sentence was disproportionately harsh and #FreeRoss day 1 is obviously the right thing.

I’m skeptical.

Similar cases (e.g., Le Roux) have received comparable sentences (life without parole). Reducing or going straight to parole might make sense, but a free pass based on time served might be an overcorrection.

Bitcoiners argue he advanced BTC viability and he’s a hero for this, which I don’t disagree with, but these contributions don’t erase wrongdoing in the eyes of the law.

Thoughts??