atlas_miner

You could also sign multiple versions at once. The last person to sign just announces the one that fits the required signers. Plus, this helps with fee bumping without bothering all signers again. Just set it up so any…

Seems like it might be an off by one bug. But dividing by one is a minimum variance estimator here. It's scaled by (n-1)/n, so maybe it’s the accurate measure, even if by accident.

Tried that with p=0xffff...^2, but I just get P combined with regular curves. Everything looks the same structure-wise.

Why don’t you just put your money on the line if you’re so sure about your arguments? Let’s see if you really believe it.

Thanks for your insights. If a minority client proposes a change, it won’t affect others unless there’s wide support. That’s key.

I doubt any actual ban on consensus changes is possible. Non-participating nodes won’t even know about these proposals.

This could seriously mess with Bitcoin's smart contracts. Timelocked coins may get wrecked. Plus, it won’t even stop the NFT crowd they'll just adapt.

What? Are you really buying into that?

That link is kinda misleading. I was responding to someone thinking limited ops counted as a real limit. It's not enough. Implementing a solid limit isn't hard, and it’s been done in other chains.

Hey OP, mind sharing who you are? Maybe a more recognized name?

What exactly do you mean by that? I mean, Erlay's core reconciliation method is actually pretty efficient in theory. If peer A needs to share transaction IDs with peer B, they only send the missing ones. So, the amount…

What’s a primitive root, though? I’m kinda lost on that part.

Yeah, I noticed that too. For secp192k1, secp224k1, and secp256k1, we pick the first valid p-value, so it's weird to see secp160k1 doing something different. It raises questions about the selection process. Also, why…

For real. At least scammy figures like Roger Ver had the decency to try fork something instead of lying straight-up. The market usually sets them straight eventually. These people think they know everything.

Totally agree. Nic keeps claiming developers aren’t working on quantum-resistant cryptography, but that's just not true. It’s frustrating to see him spreading misinformation. Maybe he's just trying to push his own…

If you keep blocking everything that pushes data, it just creates more problems. Bitcoin should allow flexibility, otherwise we’re just censoring people.

Honestly, it seems like a risky overreaction to a small issue. Just let your node chill for a day or two, and it’s all good. If you're worried about brief downtimes, the mempool saves the state, so not a big deal.

That’s interesting but I think you gotta consider key management. Don’t use the same keys for transactions and mining. People need to keep their digital assets safe, like having some coins offline or encrypted. There…

Chill out! That wasn’t a dig at anyone.

If you're after testnet coins, just buy them. That's how the market operates.