pull down to refresh
71 sats \ 0 replies \ @justin_shocknet 6h \ on: Can you please explain Bitcoin Core to me? bitcoin_beginners
You'll know that coin you receive to it is real actual Bitcoin, all the Bitcoin you've received up until now you've been trusting someone else to ensure it's authenticity.
Core is a node, supporting the network involves other things like being an economic actor, serving blocks, relaying tx's, etc... network related services.
Like what? Did you verify the code is what you want it to be? Do you want it to serve the broader network? Do you have the appropriate internet configuration for that?
You've never used Bitcoin before, now you can start...
Based on the rest of your questions, I'm assuming not. I doubt you verified the hash of the binary and you probably installed it to a backdoored OS and have 0 network security.
I should also note backups are different than non-bitcoin users are accustom to... Seed phrases aren't a thing in Core.
Can't say for certain anything has even been maintained for CPU mining, odds are if you find something that looks maintained and easy it's going to be malware.
I recall mining on a video card with this 1000 years ago when it was the standard, probably the best place to start if you're just doing it for the research:
btcd might also still have the CPU miner in it, or there's like 2012 archive versions of bitcoin coreThe plan is to consolidate the 5 eyes countries as US protectorates, Australia UK NZ come into the Overton window behind less reachy Canada/Greenland
Slow drip > flood
Article V Convention theory has never been more on track...
Atomic swaps for LN have been around nearly as long an LN and pretty stable, the Boltz implementation of them has too and the service run by Boltz is suprisingly reliable... I imagine the changes you needed to make were a customization, because you were using a clone that wasn't configured properly, and as an early user of that particular clone to it you got to find the bug.
That said, it's never going to have the UX people have become used to in crypto more broadly, where stuff is completely trust-based and centralized.
Per your other thread:
The LN invoice was raised from Wallet of Satoshi
Since you're using a trusted wallet already, there was no point in trying to do a trust-less/atomic submarine swap... you would just generate a chain address in WoS to round out the custodial UX.
Submarine swaps are really for node operators doing advanced liquidity management and generally have better grasp the end-to-end machinery, while end-users will unavoidably continue using the trusted versions for better UX.
Depends on what you're building, why you're building it, and how you're wired naturally. I guess I reject the question, because answers inherently contain lots of projection and not advice.
Could easily flip the responses around:
-
lack of conviction of what you're building means you need a daily attaboy from internet strangers with no skin in the game
-
fearing people might think you have something to hide so overcompensating with platitudes of transparency
-
fear of being out-maneuvered by competitors and so planting a decorative flag without even having shipped
Given that Steve Jobs is looked back upon as founder-Jesus, does anyone really think he paid any mind to what internet strangers would have thought about his products before the unveil?
Reality is the overwhelming majority of projects will die in obscurity, public or not. So all focus ought be simply not dying.
I like the docusign/envelope concept, consider having the option of just outputting the raw events without a log-in... I don't expect many are/will take to URI based signers like nsecapp/amber that require a native proto handler
The management console is SaaS, but on the board is self-hosted signer to plug into it so you don't need to trust us with the nsec
It's not meant to have the signer be entirely offline, but rather have it be least-privileged (eg a fenced appliance locked down with iptables and so on to only communicate via the dashboard)
The widget for apps with it is NIP-07 based, so if you'd like to drop it in there as an option I can let you know when we're ready to have others beat on it... the service side of it also allows normies that just want an email based log-in to participate without added friction.
People get real mad when you point out that better money doesn't immediately help people that don't have any money.
If the goal is signing/encrypting then there's command line nostr tools for that, browser extensions that do that are simply unfit to exist... may as well just use custodial nostr or trust the web client which is all the extension is anyway but with more storage access..
Unfamiliar but found it, https://sigit.io/ - links help when shilling...
Not quite sure I get it, it's a composer decoupled from the signer? Why can't I use it without logging in? Shouldn't the purpose of this be to give me something to sign externally?
For what exactly? Remote signing? Like BBQR?
We've got a remote signer in the works so you can self-custody your nsec on a secure system but delegate permissioned and audited access out over the internet to apps/interns based on business logic: https://auth.shock.network
You can sign an encrypt any text you want offline, transfer it, and communicate it over any messenger you like... the messenger itself is just the transport.
Given that, you can use the best signing/encryption standard for the job... Nostr's encryption and identity isn't too bad actually, so you could compose messages in an offline Nostr composer then copy the encrypted payload/signature and broadcast those from an online system
Using a browser extension for anything that's supposed to be private or secure is next-level retarded
Relevant:
WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT THE DOLLAR MILKSHAKE THEORY
When the Fed’s policy transitioned from easing to tightening, with interest rates increasing, they’re exchanging a metaphoric syringe for a big straw sucking up liquidity from global markets. As liquidity gets sucked up, the dollar strengthens against other currencies, putting immense pressure on countries with dollar-denominated debt. This creates a dangerous feedback loop. As more capital flocks into U.S. assets, supporting demand for the dollar, debts denominated in dollars globally become more expensive as countries’ local currency loses value against the dollar. As America sucks up financial flows globally, companies and governments outside the U.S. see their credit risks increase due to their diminishing ability to pay down foreign debts denominated in dollars, amplifying investors’ fears and compelling more capital to flee.
The bond market move yesterday really smells like something fucky is going down sooner rather than later
Didn't watch the video, but somewhat agree with the sentiment as written that there's it's an effort in futility for most people to be more productive than holding Bitcoin.
I think of all the businesses out there investing millions or billions that they'll never get back in Bitcoin terms, and people spinning their wheels over things that don't matter.
Quantum, AGI, Fusion
Assume he's wrong and this things will be have material impact in the next decade, how many people really need to be working on these? How much investment do they really need? My guess would be a fraction of the money chasing after them is put to good use.
Look at legacy businesses too, I was watching a CNBC clip yesterday about legacy car manufacturers... most of them struggling to reinvent themselves and stay relevant. Ffs, how many car manufacturers do we really need going forward? There's a lot of capital dying trying to save brands that just don't matter.
Bitcoin is a bet on consolidation because fiat growth ponzi has caused a ton of redundancy.
you shouldn’t learn to code for a primary job
This is true, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't learn enough to do some basic scripting and understand how to think programatically... you can do that in very little time, the rest is experience and there will always be someone more experienced willing to work for less. Basic understanding of coding is tantamount to literacy these days, even if it just helps you to use LLM's more effectively.
dump your tech stocks
Probably 95% of them yea, and not just in Bitcoin terms... so much consolidation is coming and it won't be gainful M&A for shareholders, it will be winners picking up losers assets for nickels on the dollar. The market is already pricing this in with the "MAG 7" making up almost 50% of the market.
no matter how far behind we fall back in STEM
This is retarded. America is the financial capital of the world and will remain so on a Bitcoin standard, but there's no surer way to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory by outsourcing our STEM (and therefore national security)
Pros: It could maybe possibly potentially mitigate the tx pinning attack that has yet to be proven a real world concern, and could maybe possibly potentially aid users in some extremely rare channel closure scenarios.
Cons: Nobody really knows to the full extent, which is why changes are always bad until they've been in the wild for a few years at least. I speculate this is yet another attack on the mempool, in favor of private (permissioned) mempools. Effectively this is removing a spam protection for no material gain.
Given the dramatic article attacking anyone with any rational thought on the subject, by one of the dumbest MF's in Bitcoin who seems to get paid to do exactly that over and over again, and the fact that the original proposal is from a known bad-actor salaried dev, would seem to justifiy my existing position of never running the latest versions of Core, and that we desperately need "LTS"-like versions of Core and LND to ensure bad changes are relegated to a smaller portion of the network.
I didn't know anyone still ran windows personally... it's enterprise groupware, that's like using salesforce for your cell phone contacts.
The KDE variant of Ubuntu is what I'd recommend, Kubuntu... turn-key without the craptastic GNOME UI
People that don't have any assets will continue to have no assets, nothing changes, except they'll be more upward mobile without the Cantillon effect on a Bitcoin standard... They'll also have their debt deflated away, which is positive.
Nocoiners with good assets lose some of the monetary premium vs Bitcoiners in those assets, but income from those assets will rise with fiat debasement and provide sats-flow.
It's the zombie assets that evaporate along with the zombie institutions that own them.
It's all fake. May as well be the matrix.
Even stories that might be about something reasonably true at the topical level contain presuppositions for other things that are false in the content.
Any long-standing publication has at some point been co-opted through networks of intel agencies shell companies. Influencers or independent media can be bought off cheap, if they weren't operatives or ideologically aligned to begin with.
It's 5GW information warfare, and World War 3 has been hot for longer than we can know.
There is no objective truth, and the only way to not be fooled is to accept what you cannot know- because you're not important enough to be privileged to the information from the highest levels.
That's what makes it theory I guess. The take that Satoshi being some anon individual is treated as fact because it's not falsifiable, reality is that Satoshi being an NSA op is just as likely (where I say it's more likely)... we may never know and even if we thought we did there's still no objective truth. If Satoshi did reveal themselves, how could we know for sure that wasn't itself a psyop?
Same goes with incentive theory, whether or not it was an executed plan or happened organically doesn't matter, what we have is clear evidence now that the government with the world reserve currency is being taken over by people that recognize it's ability to help save the US (or at least are paying lip service to this effect publicly).
I guess it comes down whether you prefer to believe in conspiracies, or coincidences?
Have you thought about what could erode your belief in this theory? Could anything?
This is a great question, I reserve the right to come back and resurrect this thread after an epiphany... but off the cuff I think it'd have to be a "rat poison" event like we agree is possible (squash). That would still reinforce my theory it's an intel op though, just a dark one rather than a white hat one.
The problem is, even if "Satoshi" revealed themselves and signed with their keys etc as proof... we still couldn't falsify the op theory. That Satoshir could be an actor/agent within the op, just as politicians and CEO are agents for the apparatus.
I suppose NSA/GCHQ etc could just publicly break the encryption or exploit backdoored chips and start sweeping exchange cold wallets for funsies, thus destroying the ledger, but even that still doesn't mean they didn't create it... it's just a different type of rat poison event.
I guess I just follow the evidence, but have to be content with the fact that evidence is not proof, because ultimately there's no objective truth at this scale.
waiting for the one true wallet connector: https://github.com/stackernews/stacker.news/issues/1478
Re-brand of the NIP #'s incoming...
Texas would probably be the driving force, all those distressed assets in Alberta are ripe for the Texas petro-oligarchy
I'm only half-joking, it's not a simple addition... the US becomes a new country: #835195