liminal ⚡

@phtevenstrong You deify tech to a point that's ridiculous (there's a name for that: cargo cult). Average accuracy is irrelevant, because not even oMeGA can't violate the laws of causality

The EV on picking only box B is positive whenever Omega has >50.05% accuracy. That said, if you're a mother with no money and starving children, you might reasonably take both boxes for a minimum of $1K because even Omega at 99.999% accuracy isnt enough to risk getting nothing.

@Vladcostea @Truthcoin How many reorgs from height 964000 until they give up?

The Ecash hard fork is coming at block height 964000 Whether you like it or not

@BitsagaRob "compatibility" is a myth, especially if you care about privacy (which you should). If you have to spoonfeed your wallet numbers and gap limits then you aren't cross compatible, nor even stateless restorable

No seed phrase means no compatibility with other wallets, this smells like a closed ecosystem. 2of3 multisig default is great, but bitcoin is an open standard and seed phrases have become a core pillar. Hate to see it left out. Should be exportable.

@mugundhanbalaji @GriFdotpy @kostascrypto @veorq Right, and even for 1024 he only did so as a non-ZK proof

@GriFdotpy @kostascrypto @veorq for ethical reason, he did not publish the 2048 keys and 4096 keys.

I factored the number RSA1024-1 using my home-built QPU stack; alarming sign that RSA1024 will soon be broken. I'm choosing Full Disclosure, in the interest of transparency and Science advancement: gist.github.com/veorq/25bee6ef… Non-ZK proof that the correct RSA1024 was used: #RSA-1024" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti… @yuvadm your move

10h ago @litecoin experienced a coordinated attack on the chain that resulted in 13 blocks reorg that took more than 3h to generate. During this time attackers were performing double spend attacks on multiple cross-chain swapping protocols. We are investigating the situation.

@sfpeter @mikemcg0 LMAO I wasn't expecting to hit a nerve so hard with that: Etherium, Etherium, Etherium

@liminalbolt @mikemcg0 No one is going to take your opinion seriously if you don't even know how to spell Ethereum

"I used to be a bitcoiner. The transition to a new store of value only happens once every 3,000 years. That's the main prize -- just focus on that. But [security] is the criteria that ultimately convinced me to flip from Bitcoin to ETH." "I have a higher degree of certainty that Ethereum will be around longer [than Bitcoin]. The reason for that is because Bitcoin relies on proof-of-work, which is less efficient than proof-of-stake and doesn't scale with the value of the network. And as the block subsidy of Bitcoin halves every four years, it is increasingly becoming more and more reliant on transaction fees to fund the security budget paid to miners." "If you look at [Bitcoin's] security budget right now, about 0.6% of revenue to miners is transaction fees... The problem with that is if Bitcoin becomes 'digital gold', flips gold, and becomes a $30 trillion asset, but it only costs $10-20 billion to attack it, that's too asymmetric." "You want the security budget to scale with the market cap, similar to how countries spend a % of their GDP on defense. The more valuable something is, the more you need to spend to protect it." "Ethereum, with the Merge, migrated to proof-of-stake, which is fundamentally more secure because it's less reliant on transaction fees and it scales with the value of the network. If 1/3rd of ETH is staked and then you need 1/3rd of those ETH to censor the network, you're looking at roughly 10% of the total market cap as the cost to attack the network." "So if Ethereum flips Bitcoin and gold and becomes a $30 trillion asset, it'll cost ~$3 trillion to attack the Ethereum network versus Bitcoin at like $10 billion." "The other aspect here is that as AI hyperscalers invest more and more in AI, proof-of-work becomes increasingly vulnerable because the cost to attack the Bitcoin network is starting to look close to the quarterly CapEx these hyperscalers are spending on their data centers." Full interview on @Bankless with @VivekVentures discussing the new @Etherealize_io "Productive Money" report below.

@alistairmilne many issues with that. "Highs" and "lows" are timescale dependent, and so, essentially, cherry picked, and besides they don't even get it right: their 17592 low was obviously revisited few months afterwards

This. Except the lows on Coinbase, Binance, etc. were 60k and therefore the threshold was $78,000 ... which we're already above.

@jyn_urso Well done! Gaudeamus igitur

Hello. Dr. Paez is in the house.

@Probert_paulson @MCC_Brussels Both EP and EC are right-wing led / have right-wing majority.

@MCC_Brussels The ministry of Democracy. Unless of course a "right wing" political party wins an election. Then it's a case of election interference from the Russians.

In honour of the EU Commission's new Orwellian banner, here are the top 10 examples of how the EU undermines democracy in Europe 🧵

@The_Backward_Z @GMShivers This. What's actually "delusional" is the thought that it's normal that middle men take the lion's share for their value added. If muh logistics truly inflates prices five times then we must rethink the whole thing and consume locally.

@GMShivers dynamic at play in modern wage labor. It is correct to say that the ownership class benefits from the exploited labor of the working class. Economic logistics can still happen minus the ownership class skimming the maximum profit off the top. It'd work a LOT better, actually...

if you're a young person and you think the person at the cash register at mcdonalds should get 100% of the money the meal makes, you are 100x more greedy and delusional than the worst CEO on earth, and you need to fix that in yourself to get out of your situation in life.

@izakaminska @Eric_Lockwood1 That's not correct. Ramming is accessorial. Pegging is a mechanical coupling; as such the sexual metaphor is closer to the concept than the financial metaphor.

@Eric_Lockwood1 One involves ramming the other one involves clutching. Totally different.

To whom it may concern. It is with a degree of reluctance that I find myself compelled to draw attention to a rather serious wrong that has, of late, afflicted the monetary world. It is a wrong that bears significant systemic consequences for all of us, albeit mostly for me. It relates to the unfortunate usage of the term “pegging” by parties operating outside financial and monetary contexts. This "appropriation" is now giving rise to a degree of stigma, with negative digital externalities, for those of us who still primarily associate the term with its original financial usage. I would respectfully remind readers that such usage — leaving aside carpentry, camping, and clothes-hanging — has a long-standing heritage dating back to at least the 1930s: a rightful original claim, if ever there was one. This is why I have decided, as of today, to launch an unofficial campaign to reappropriate the term for its rightful monetary application. Why now? In what can only be described as a fairly profound display of innocence, when I decided to rebrand my stablecoin publication to ThePeg.co (formerly Cash Equivalence), I was not aware that the term had, in recent years, been… err, repurposed to denote what might be put mildly as an expression of female empowerment. I realised something wasn't quite right while at lunch with a male bank equity analyst late last year, specifically when he began to chuckle awkwardly upon the reference. I have since educated myself on the term’s “other” meaning, which (as far as I can tell) has a rather less illustrious pedigree, emerging only around 2001. The proper financial usage, I should point out, was chiefly popularised in the aftermath of Bretton Woods, when the dollar was famously pegged to gold and other currencies to the dollar. This is why the name seemed a perfect fit for a publication focused not just on stablecoins, but on the broader rewiring of the global financial system. Central bank archives, I would stress, are jam-packed with pegging references — currencies pegged, rates pegged, regimes pegged, etc. Pegs everywhere. Given this rather weighty heritage, it seemed difficult to justify retreat upon familiarisation with the more salacious application. On reflection, in a supposedly female-empowered era, there was really only one option: lean into the faux pas. It is not the first time, after all, I’ve been caught out by my naivety (famous Virgin Atlantic story, IYKYK). Moreover, as a long-time James Bond fan, I decided it was about time that the finance industry loosen its tie, ditch the stiff demeanour, and indulge in a bit of tongue-in-cheek humour like they used to in the good old eurodollar days. Alas, the real trouble began when I set up my new email: @thepeg.co It turns out that corporate email filters, now the vigilant defenders of professional decorum in an increasingly no-fun-allowed environment, preemptively block even entirely respectable emails if they originate from an outfit called thepeg.co. This is, understandably, a problem for a journalist who needs to engage in overt solicitation to land stories. For now, I have resorted to my other "safe for work" domain, the-blindspot.com (ironically named, given this story). But this is proving suboptimal. This is why, after yet another pingback, I decided today something more proactive needs to be done. Hence, the woeful publicisation of my story in the hope of stimulating an organic, widespread reappropriation campaign — one that may yet compel corporate filters the world over to open up to The Peg. At this point, I would gently remind readers that it's not just the most powerful central banks and publications in the world that boast ample references to pegging. There are 7,263 references to things being "pegged" in the Financial Times alone. I attach pictorial evidence of such respectable historic usage, in the hope it might assist those wishing to lobby their web managers on my behalf that pegs should not, in fact, be blocked. Thank you for your attention to this matter. The destigmatisation of “pegging” is no laughing matter. We must work together to restore the term to its rightful place in monetary discourse.

Tell us the whole story. Because Peter Vessenes could not pay you back the BTC he promised and was paid for, you had him on the hook. And you wouldn't just let him slip. So when MtGox went down, you both smelled an opportunity. You backed @vessenes in his ridiculous Coinlab vs. MtGox claim. In February 2019, CoinLab then increased its claim from $75 million to $16 billion, a sum that would have consumed all remaining BTC of MtGox - leaving the original 127,000 creditors with nothing. @MagicalTux called it outrageous, and it was. The CoinLab claim became the biggest roadblock delaying Mt. Gox creditors from receiving their funds for years, complicating the procedure. To this day, some MtGox creditors did not receive their money because of you and Peter Vessenes. Yeah, we all loved you, when you rooted for Bitcoin. But when I realized how you wouldn't blink an eye to screw us over any time, you lost me.

This is why streaming services have famously reduced their prices, not added stream quality tiers below HD and not added ads. The free market makes sure that if they all raise their prices a new streaming service will enter an-… Wait. [checks notes] No… no no no no, noooooo

@Libinlahara @ayebytes The legacy checksums aren't great, but we upgraded to the more robust BCH codes in the modern "bc1" Segwit and Taproot addresses

@ayebytes Checksums are underrated. They do not prevent every mistake, but they dramatically reduce invalid address acceptance.

Bitcoin addresses are resistant to human errors (like changing or deleting a character) because they include a checksum. the checksum is additional data embedded in the address that allows it to be validated, ensuring all characters are correct a Bitcoin address typically has three components: a prefix that indicates the address type, a hash of your public key, and the checksum. all of this is encoded to produce the final address

@pourteaux In Defitardia they have different types of pools and vaults. In that one, depositors probably didn't choose the backing collateral, it was delegated to a curator.

my defense of World Liberty Financial:

🚨 The Pentagon summoned the Pope’s ambassador to a closed-door meeting and threatened him. Named official. On record. Undersecretary of Defense Elbridge Colby called Cardinal Christophe Pierre to the Pentagon and delivered this message: “The United States has the military power to do whatever it wants in the world. The Catholic Church had better take its side.” Then a U.S. official invoked the Avignon Papacy — the 14th century moment when the French monarchy used military force to physically remove the Pope from Rome and bend the Church to its will. The Vatican understood the reference immediately. The Pope’s planned visit to America for the 250th anniversary celebration was cancelled. And then something remarkable happened. The Pope didn’t retreat. He pressed harder. He called the war unjust. He called Trump’s threats unacceptable. He told Americans to call Congress.

@M20361247Mark @plankton_35 @TerribleMaps Wait what did you do to West Sahara

@plankton_35 @TerribleMaps no? the correct one is: (just forget about europe and Asia)

Very few Americans can name all these African countries by u/nspacia

@lopp And yet you help promote the "Patoshi" nonsense

There are clues to Satoshi's identity that are closely held secrets by those who found them. Clues I've discovered exist only in my head. Even those of us who have researched Satoshi deeply dare not share them with each other lest they be leaked. x.com/lopp/status/18…

@pourteaux Satoshi never had 1M coins lol. That's a joke "in 2009 there wasn't anyone in Bitcoin, it must've been Satoshi alone" which turned into a weird foundational myth. The reality is that the code (it's always been public and open) doesn't mine blocks if it's alone.

If Satoshi were alive today and had access to her coins, she would either have sold (if selfish) or burned them (if acting in bitcoin's interest). the continued exitence of satoshi's coins in a utxo is a tail risk to bitcoin holders, as the price would crash if 1M coins suddenly came online. doing neither is inconsistent with a Satoshi who is alive at all, regardless of whether she has bitcoin's or her own interest in mind.