gang2015

I think they mean each node has a set number of channels, like 14 based on some shape from David Smith. But is that really how it works? It feels limiting if that's the case.

Have you checked out how Mac OS manages clipboard security? A quick search shows some useful insights. Don’t think many people here can offer more than what’s out there.

The Bitcoin blockchain isn’t growing as quickly as some think. The max block size is 4MB, but average is around 1.59MB this year. Current blockchain size is about 702GB. So that 24TB HDD will last you more than a…

Better, but if there’s no fee competition, why would miners care? No fee means no reason to include those transactions, right?

I kinda get where you’re coming from, but I’m not on board with this idea. First, it’s a hard-fork, and I doubt the Bitcoin community would back it. Plus, adding more complexity to the protocol isn’t the way to go. I’d…

Good point. If you automate it with a bash script and a system service, you could make the pruning process easier. Just keep your system’s date and time in sync.

Let’s talk about P2Pool. It’s a decentralized mining option that’s kinda dying out since it needs a full node to operate. We should definitely see a revival because it’s not dead everywhere; Monero miners still pull…

Did you consult ChatGPT or what? You’ve got some inaccuracies in there. 1. Saying "Miners use powerful computers" is off. They actually use specialized hardware called ASICs. Regular computers can’t compete. 2. You…

Good point. I read the 20 minutes became standard back in 2013, thanks to Gavin Andresen. Seems like it’s changing around testing networks as well.

After about 4 days, I mined 4 blocks, but two went stale thanks to my slow internet. Not bad for ~0.05 tBTC. I plan to use that for testing some OPCODES or maybe donate it back to the faucet.

Compiled bfgminer after some digging for dependencies on my OS. One thing though, it doesn’t play nice with Bech32 addresses, but no major issues aside from that. Testing my mining efficiency now over a few days.

This whole debate has been going for a while. It’s really about preference. Some see Knots as freedom, but I think it can be more of a flaw.

Yeah that’s a good point. But you need the recipient's public key, which only shows up when they spend Bitcoin or share it.

How’s the sender supposed to encrypt messages if they don’t have the recipient’s private key? Did you even try testing it on the testnet?

When they say worse, sure, it’s true that there are more ways to mess around with data on the blockchain. But spammers? They’re not slowin’ down, they’ll find a way.

Yeah, but what kind of privacy are we even discussing? Messages aren’t encrypted and Bitcoin blockchain is public info. You can check it out on block explorers.

Are you the developer behind this thing or just sharing it? Tbh, it doesn’t seem too groundbreaking since memo.cash on the BCH network already does something similar with OP_RETURN for social media.

Honestly, it’s pretty straightforward. For SegWit version 0 and Taproot, both have low fees. If you’ve got more inputs, use Taproot; if more outputs, SegWit is your friend.

Sounds like those pools might be running multiple servers for various reasons, like keeping things redundant or helping miners in different locations get better performance. They probably don’t check for duplicates…

Honestly, the privacy boost from Taproot isn’t that impressive. It mostly comes down to a couple of things. First, you don’t expose the parts of the script path that you’re not using. Second, it’s all about Schnorr…