You can now pre-order Bitkey! Consider it as a holiday gift for friends and loved ones who want to get their bitcoin off exchanges but are scared to self custody. nostr:note1l7f84gy2r58r6u320mthyvweus3uw0k99dggrnj7kgn4wjkg752spfy0ry
Detailed 22 pager on Bitkey's recovery. Highly recommended read for anyone who nerds out on self-custody. https://bitkey.build/sharing-our-recovery-design/
More performant and reliable than Tor and much cheaper than a generalized VPN service. Hopefully will just be baked into bitcoin wallets.
More attention should be paid to OHTTP in the bitcoin space
nostr:note1emntr0t76k3xufu9c9qljvdneachzewdg7pxqlqs7xfjhtr9fzpqc2mqwx
That's one big screen
How centralized is Bitcoin mining regarding the providers of the hardware? Do people care when buying hardware?
People speculate a lot about how much money it would take to arm a 51% attack but rarely do I see people worry about that money coming from trusting customers.
The currently biggest producer of Bitcoin mining hardware - BitMain - set precedence for a kill switch https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1888573.0 that if present could be used to "incentivize" miners to follow their policy decisions - honor blacklists for example.
How well are we protected against miners activating such a kill switch after some specific activation date? I assume they are closed source, so it would be hard to detect before a triggering date.
We need more chip makers and to open up these systems more.
Substantial improvements to the WS experience! nostr:note1kpqfjxf6fejl0rdnsppanmkwsg45erpcrfdhmtex74czrcxg7r6sd0l22q
Where are you imagining running VLS?
We have advocated. See the advocacy website I linked. And spoken to PMs and engineers at some of the companies. They don't see it as a business priority.
Would love to see analysis of how bad it is relative to LN flood and loot https://arxiv.org/abs/2006.08513
When will exchanges support bech32m? Until then it is risky for a wallet to be taproot-only. https://whentaproot.org/
Can you elaborate?
As long as you're confident a quorum of signers properly delete old shares then you're good. For example, someone could steal one device in a 2of3 and the other 2 signers you control can generate a new set of 3 shares and properly delete their two shares. The thief's share is pointless then.
My daughter Autumn, has released a studio recorded version of her original song, Out of Line. Give it a listen! https://tidal.com/track/299043672
Wow!
Yup you just have to be sure the old shares are properly deleted
There are examples of doing this though such as limiting the size of OP_RETURN, the introduction of standard transactions on Core as a forwarding policy, limiting the depth of child/parent transactions, limiting the size of a transaction, etc. Do you consider all of these a different category?
(I'm not suggesting we "do something" but I'm just exploring whether it is a reasonable discussion or not.)