I wore a bitcoin core t-shirt today at
#Bitcoin2022
(along w/
@achow101
). Quite a few people asked, "What's bitcoin core?"
It's... bitcoin. I guess people added "core" because it was confusing.
"So you work for Bitcoin Core?"
You cannot still, never have been able to, and never will be able to, "withdraw BTC on other networks".
Securing Bitcoin also involves calling out hostile redefinition of Bitcoin.
Binance has temporarily paused
#Bitcoin
withdrawals on the $BTC network. Meanwhile, you can still withdraw BTC on other networks.
This is due to a stuck on-chain transaction. Our team is currently working on a solution and will provide further updates soon.
A few months ago, I read about
@Lightspark
, a new company whose goal is to “explore, build and extend the capabilities and utility of Bitcoin.”
“Huh.” I thought, “That’s also been my goal for the last decade or so.”
Really frustrating to see laser-eyesers applauding an attack on mainnet LND.
Sure, fixing bugs makes bitcoin stronger. Sure, it's the currency of enemies.
But bitcoin and LN are not magically invincible / inevitable. Attacks don't help.
I've posted Utreexo, a new paper about bitcoin scalability, to IACR ePrint.
Thanks to those who helped with this work and looking forward to criticisms and getting and implementation running.
Just released v0.1 of utreexo software & wrote about it here:
take a look, test it out, and write some crash reports :)
It's been great working with the other utreexo developers so far & looking forward to more people working on it!
None of these people were dumb. They'd just never heard of it. Some of the people I explained it to wanted to download it. Some wanted to start help coding it.
Hopefully this helps.
Huge conference, so many people... but really it's all just a program you run on your computer.
This isn't just about threatening bitcoin; this is threatening all open source software, one of the most amazing and useful (and free!) ideas of the last few decades.
So sounds like the libbitcoin guy thinks that
head -c 32 /dev/urandom | sha256sum
and
date +%s%N | sha256sum
are the same thing. And changing the former to the latter in wallet key generation code is cool.
Stay far, far away.
@evoskuil
@hrdng
This is not true. Reliance on the OS RNG is generally secure. All private keys in bitcoind / bitcoin-qt (and basically every other wallet) have always used the OS RNG.
Giving a talk at
#crypto2018
in ~an hour. New stuff, will be fun!
Before going, I've had to tell a couple people they've been doing this conference since 1981.
#CryptoMeansCryptography
People at MIT who are interested in this stuff! I'm teaching a class with
@neha
:
Mondays & Wednesdays at 10AM.
People interested but not around here:
There will be videos (though probably not live); problem sets also public.
@nic__carter
I'm thinking more and more that it's got to be intentional. It is absolutely trivial to build a seed generator into a wallet:
cat /dev/urandom | tr -dc 'A-Z9' | fold -w 81 | head -n 1
done.
It's past Hanlon's razor for me; I assume malice.
Problem here: sha-256 is a cryptographic hash function, preventing professor Green from understanding the answer.
I suggest use of a collision-friendly non cryptographic hash function, if a suitable one can be found.
@matthew_d_green
@Peace_Bruv
SHA-256 hash of the answer is 9a5cefc2aea372f1625a6cf49874ff39baf90f0238ce54d6b73afc0aceb60637.
So? Will you comment on that summary?
It's been awesome working with everyone at the
@mitDCI
for these years, and I look forward to collaborating with the great students and researchers there in the future!
With Lightning 1.1 we will be taking a big step away from 1.0. Interestingly there’s a parallel to Bitcoin history where the protocol has outlived its creator and now has a life of its own. As we fix key original design errors, no one is making specious claims to original vision.
Coworkers argued for the existence of people unaware that tether is a scam. Seems obvious enough but I'll say again: tether is a scam. "USDT" will be worthless much sooner than USDs or BTCs will.
@C4R3Bear
@KimDotcom
@jcp
Yeah, probably. It's more to inform people who might read this it and not know what's true, than to convince someone to stop spreading falsehoods.
@kallewoof
@TheBlueMatt
Just pre-mine a whole bunch of it, like 15%, or 75%, or heck all of it. Then nobody will ever assign it a real world value!
...right?
I read it at 1 am, often gesticulating in frustration at the monitor. I wasn't aware of bitcoin in 2009, but I have to imagine it was pretty different as *it wasn't worth money*.
There's probably an interesting paper to be had digging through early bitcointalk. This isn't it.
unpublished paper uses extranonces to attribute early miners. finds that certain agents had lots of hashpower in 2009/10, especially early GPU miners. some miners could have attacked network but didnt.
NYT: "BTC isn't anonymous! decentralization theater!"
@kallewoof
Taproot is annoyingly clever. "Oh I totally could have thought of that!" ... yeah but I didn't, and nobody else did either. (Well Greg just did.)
And so similar to the pay-to-contract-hash stuff which also seems easy once someone else figures it out :)
Found via user dethos on HN - the whole paper is just a copy / paste of which explains monero for beginners (though not sure how successfully) and describing XOR makes some sense in the original context.
"We've been longing for approval from heads of states and billionaires for so long, but today we finally know it was all worth it!" said one cyber-coin enthusiast when asked about recent events.
G: [shows Wright witness statement] You say you've done all you can to build in versioning etc. You say BTC has limited size of script, gives little ability to add data. It refers to a GitHub page. [shows page] Declaring constant int MAX_SCRIPT_ELEMENT_SIZE. Do you know what
Attacks, fighting, trolling, misinformation - I'll deal with it.
It's super cringey stuff like this that makes me want to find another line of work.
(Don't worry, they'll need a lot more of this to stop me :)
[1/3] 100x Group is delighted to announce that it has awarded a US$40,000 one-year grant to Utreexo researcher & developer Calvin Kim. Calvin was instrumental in the development of the first demonstration release of Utreexo
@maxipleb
UTXO data lives in both ~/.bitcoin/chainstate and ~/.bitcoin/blocks; witness data lives only in ~/.bitcoin/blocks.
Chainstate is a DB and lots of I/O; blocks are flat files with little to no I/O.
Witness data is cheaper to deal with so makes sense for it to be cheaper to create.
Blockchain-y conference panel in Taiwan moderated by some guy who's doing an ICO to build bcash ICOs.
Politely decline, or go? Give ICOers the stage to themselves, or possibly give them more attention by participating?
Asking for a friend.
Overlooked environmental / existential benefit of PoW:
Each TSMC wafer etched with SHA256d ASICs is one fewer floating point AI wafer for the paperclip hypnodrone singleton.
@ajtowns
The whole idea doesn't make sense anyway. If you can get everyone to agree on which txs are propagated without mining then mining doesn't add anything and just wastes electricity.
BREAKING:
Bitcoin developers demolish
#Faketoshi
in Pineapple Hack lawsuit: Wright is defeated in jurisdiction challenge.
"it is not realistically arguable that the pleaded facts amount to a fiduciary relationship"
I'll go find more quotes, hold on.
Have been in Korea the last few days; nice place.
Have not encountered a single wifi captive portal.
Hard to recognize the annoying things you've become desensitized to until they're gone :)
@hrdng
@petertoddbtc
@petertodd
Yup! Scary as there are currently no checks of what address you can send *to*. Totally new code needed in LN to prevent this.
@evoskuil
@hrdng
This is not true. Reliance on the OS RNG is generally secure. All private keys in bitcoind / bitcoin-qt (and basically every other wallet) have always used the OS RNG.
@bradmillscan
Utreexo works, people can run it today. The part that hasn't happened is getting it merged into bitcoin core: tricky as it touches a whole lot of code.
Maybe it's better for it to be it's own node software. Or maybe we want it in core, who knows.
@ajtowns
@wtogami
It does look cool in general, but nip04 is broken in several ways. (non-uniform AES key, CBC with no MAC instead of GCM)
Guess I should make an issue...
@BikesandBitcoin
These systems aren't anti-fragile on their own: it's people in front of their computer fixing bugs.
And you get better bug fixes when those people have time to review vs writing an emergency fix while everyone is screaming at them.
Also, while the saying "If you're not embarrassed by the first version, you've posted too late" may be true, a paper can be both posted much too late, and still cause for some embarrassment! :P
@gertjaap
HTLCs don't work for micropayments (below tx fee level), though single satoshi payments can be securely made within a channel. Pretending 1-satoshi HTLCs are a thing is setting people up to be disappointed...
$ bitcoin-cli getrawtransaction 0301e0480b374b32851a9462db29dc19fe830a7f7d7a88b81612b9d42099c0ae | wc
1 1 7876767
Well... we might have a chance to test out some fee related code now.
@renepickhardt
@davidmarcus
@lightspark
Do you mean like how UDP is unreliable (by design)? (But usually works fine for lots of things)
If so then yeah, payment success has improved a lot in the last couple years, without any fundamental change in protocol.
@evoskuil
@hrdng
So you replaced something that's secure 99.999999% of the time with something that's secure 0% of the time. Because neither is secure.
Submitted my ~1 byte of feedback to .gov. Went to town hall at 7:10am, no line, was 5th voter of the day. Also in MA voted for ranked choice. Would more than double our current 4bits/year data rate if it passes!
Revisiting prior work,
@mitDCI
researcher
@tdryja
presents "Discreet Log Contracts" as a way to bring further conditional functionality and interactivity to Bitcoin.
#CryptoEconSys20