pull down to refresh
Mining aims to find new blocks, fuzzing tries to find new vulnerabilities. Both require wast amounts of computing power to explore the search space.
For a cryptographic hash function we believe there is no shortcut and you just have to bruteforce to find the desired prefix, in fuzzing you can have heuristics to guide you - like is the program crashing, was this function visited or did something else unexpected happen with this random input.
This is getting silly. But let's see if the people crying about people evading filters will try to evade filters by changing their version string.
Until shops offer only archaic payment rails like credit cards there is no way I am allowing an AI agent to autonomously pay. OTOH if it was possible to pay with lightning there could be some simple MCP integration for paying invoices. I'd have a macaroon allowing 1 mil sats per day and then I could dynamically adjust limits for a specific agent on this service running on my node.
Nice thing, but no need to panic. It's an issue just when you use the obscure CHROOT option in sudoers.
Well I know about https://github.com/lightninglabs/aperture and that Lightning Labs uses something like that for their Loop service. I think they even wrote the LSAT standard which is now a bit extended in the form of L402. It is a clever reuse of the existing HTTP 402 status code with lightning micropayments. Then there is for instance FewSats which offer even more payment options (to make it more normie friendly).
Nice, looks like something directly out of Star Wars. What are the specs, how high can it fly and for how long?
So wtf does one need to provide recipient name beside IBAN?! I always thought apart for silly surveillance it's also in case of legal disputes (my intention was person X receives the money). Since obviously if IBAN can just be recycled it's not reliable for any practical use.
It was bound to happen as soon as Milei revealed he had no clue about bitcoin. Government is evil but I doubt all of the leaders were directly rug pulling. The people in charge have no idea about that "new shinny thing" -> they hire some cRyPtO advisers and boom.
There is a V2 already that doesn't need trusted setup: https://brqgoo.medium.com/introducing-brollup-v2-now-without-the-trusted-setup-fce9c0098177
Seems a bit unethical from CertiK. Oops, you got me, now, I'll disclose my findings and return the money. In any case I am waiting for the full write-up.
UX change that caused this, so basically shitcoins got double spent but Kraken did not notice that / wait for enough confirmations or is there some actual technical vulnerability on top of it?
I mean isn't git distributed anyway? Likely at least one developer (you) has the code locally or it was probably nothing really important. I'd be more worried if they tried to silently backdoor the code or something.
Generating an address with chosen prefix and/or suffix is done by randomly choosing a private key and checking what the outcome is. It's similar as mining: every character more is exponentially more expensive, you don't have any difficulty adjustments tho. According to https://github.com/kangaderoo/vanitygen vanity address generator it's like 45 seconds for 4 chars of course depending on your hardware.
The attack actually works in that way that a similar address as yours sends you some small amount and then when you next time try to send to yourself you mistakenly send to that address. Of course this address reuse is already a problem on itself. I doubt attackers use more than one hour to generate those.
There is a valid use case for having just xpubs for instance for your point of sale device. In that case a malicious wallet could indeed give out wrong addresses. But there is no reason to even mimic addresses similar to the correct ones.
Wow, very cool.
Didn't really know about:
- https://github.com/BlockstreamResearch/codex32
- https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0093.mediawiki
before.
I mean yeah, "all models are wrong, some are useful". There is little doubt stock to flow is a fundamental influencing price and we'll eventually hit 500k, but this prediction model is just wrong. By PlanB's own criteria. But instead of admitting it and saying oh well this didn't work out but my gut feeling is still this price tag, he's just falsifying evidence on how the model was always on track and that is what I don't like.
Ok I get that we don't want assassination markets, but if someone is dead he is also out of power or am I mistaken? What must have happened for this to resolve in favour of those betting on YES? Maduro style kidnapping? Him being replaced by a local rival? What about power transition with a triumvirate with 2 "new" supreme leaders-if he remains the third is he out of power or not?