Perfectly understandable!

The idea was to bring some technical details about it. It is perfectly reasonable!

In the first version of Bitcoin's code released by Satoshi Nakamoto, the term "Timechain" was used to describe the sequence of blocks that make up Bitcoin. This terminology may have been chosen due to the sequential nature of the blocks, which are added approximately every ten minutes. However, as the project developed and the code evolved, all references to "Timechain" were removed, replaced by more generic terms like "chain" and "chain of blocks."

There are several theories about why Satoshi decided to remove the term "Timechain." The most plausible is that he realized the terminology did not adequately capture the nature of the Bitcoin network. Let's analyze some points that may have influenced this decision:

Another interesting point is the philosophy of time itself. Time is a concept widely discussed in both philosophy and science. There are debates about its nature, existence, and how it should be measured. However, there is consensus that time is a continuous sequence and divisible into measurable units such as seconds, minutes, and hours. This divisibility allows time to be predictable and used to measure events consistently.

In the context of Bitcoin, while we can predict that a block will be added every ten minutes on average, we cannot predict the exact moment a block will be created. This imprecision makes the concept of "Timechain" inadequate, as Bitcoin's block chain does not follow an exact time sequence.

In the original Bitcoin code, there were references to "hashTimechainBest," which indicated the best block within the longest chain. Over time, this terminology was replaced by terms like "hashBestChain" and "chainWork," which refer to the difficulty and accumulated work in the block chain. This change reflects a deeper understanding of Bitcoin's nature and operation.

In the code revised by Gavin Andresen, one of Bitcoin's early developers, we no longer find references to "Timechain." Instead, we see an emphasis on "chain" and "block," focusing on network integrity and security. The removal of "Timechain" and the adoption of "chain of blocks" (in the whitepaper) or simply "chain" indicate an evolution in understanding what constitutes the Bitcoin network and how it should be described.

Over time, the term "blockchain" gained popularity and was widely adopted, not only in the Bitcoin community but also in many other distributed ledger technology (DLT) applications. "Blockchain" has become a buzzword to describe any chain of interconnected blocks that maintain transaction records in a decentralized and secure manner.

This led some Bitcoin maximalists to reject the term "blockchain," arguing that it has been co-opted by projects that do not maintain the same standards of security and decentralization as Bitcoin. Instead, these maximalists prefer to use "Timechain" to highlight the differences and maintain the purity of the original Bitcoin concept. However, this adoption of "Timechain" can be seen as an attempt to distance themselves from other projects and maintain a unique identity, even if the term does not accurately capture the network's nature.

The discussion between "Timechain" and "Blockchain" is more than just a matter of terminology; it reflects the evolving understanding of how Bitcoin and other distributed ledger technologies work. By removing the term "Timechain," Satoshi Nakamoto demonstrated an adaptation to the technical and practical realities of the Bitcoin network. The term "blockchain" has become widely accepted and understood, capturing the essence of what the network truly does: a chain of blocks that records transactions in a secure and decentralized manner.

While some in the community may continue to use "Timechain" to differentiate themselves, it is important to recognize that Satoshi's change in terminology was based on a deeper understanding of the network's limitations and capabilities. The adoption of "blockchain" as the standard term reflects this evolution and the wide applicability of the technology in various contexts beyond Bitcoin.

So, whether you are a Bitcoin enthusiast who prefers "Timechain" or someone who adopts the term "blockchain," the important thing is to understand the philosophy and technology behind these terms. Bitcoin remains a revolutionary innovation, regardless of the name we give to its structure of interconnected blocks.

Unfortunately yes. PGP has issues with usability, but it is safe.

The idea was to create something fast, reliable, simple, easy to verify, and trustworthy. This is the first version, and a lot can change.

For our community, I think it is better to release something safe and discuss what to change in usability than the opposite.

With the core working properly, the goal is to develop UX even if it means changing algos, etc. :)

Yes, and both should exchange their public keys between them. This is because the plugin manages to encrypt the messages and decrypt the messages they identify.

Since there is no connection to APIs or the backend, imagine Twitter as the backend infrastructure for the messaging and the plugin as a layer over Twitter that handles the e2ee encryption.

I recommend using ECC 25519 in README because of RSA's massive and slow keys. It is secure, fast, and widely used today.

GPG is not 'anti-goal'. It is about security and anti-surveillance.

Thank you for the feedback!

I believe GPG is a legacy, but far from obsolete. There are definitely new protocols and developments, but this extension does not intend to be a full messenger.

As you said, it is an overlay encoding for social media. The tool was designed to not make online transactions like negotiating keys. It is designed to be simple, light and do everything locally.

I am willing to implement other functionalities and evolve the tool, but as a first version, I think it is safe enough to solve the problem of exchanging private messages on Twitter (and other social media soon)

Thank you very much!

thanks!

thanks!

Hopefully, I'll be able to publish the entire album as soon as Winamp resolves their current issues.

In the meantime, I've already published a few tracks on my pages at https://wavlake.com/eddieoz and https://soundcloud.com/eddieoz. And the lyrics for these tracks can be found on my website: https://www.eddieoz.com/tag/music/ :) I sincerely hope you enjoy the music!

I think it works very well if you can pin this post. :) Thanks!

Thank you very much for the kind mention!!

The idea behind this story was to create a Bitcoin journey through a cyberpunk realm, where a trader starts to learn more deeply about Bitcoin beyond just the investment aspect. The hero learns a lot of technical details, but also delves into the complex realms of morality and ethics within our ecosystem.

I sincerely hope the readers enjoy the story and find it engaging!

Hey, yeah!!! Let's do it!

I was waiting to publish another track because Winamp had 'internal issues' and was not able to distribute the album properly. I was waiting to release something. Because people were asking for this specific song, I published only it.

I hope you like the album! I'm getting good feedback about it! :)