Random trip to Twitter and I found a bunch of ETH people sharing around some chart of Lightning that suggested that like 70% of the liquidity instantly (like straight line down) dropped off the network... and they all thought it was real.
Tons of comments like "it was already dead anyway," "of course, they will still defend it," and "not surprising, nobody uses it because it doesn't work."
What makes it so funny is that if they even knew how lightning worked it would be obvious that they were simply looking at a data bug 🤣 . Unless there was some sort of crazy attack, there's literally just no reason to shut down 70% of the channels across thousands of nodes ALL AT ONCE *even* if there was nobody using it (even though traffic is up like 1000% or more). There's no huge cost in just having it there unless a sudden risk emerges or there was simply one massive entity with all the liquidity that had a problem and their node crashed and shut down channels.
It's just not hard at all to understand that this was clearly just bogus data, and it took all of 3 seconds to find a different site and check it. But hundreds of commenters couldn't manage it 🤣
I legit thought we were past the "LIGhTNinG doEsN'T WoRK" phase but i guess i was just in a bubble since i use it as my primary money and payment network every single day.
UX Idea:
Have clients recognize relay links specifically inside of a comment and insert a small "add" button that automatically puts them in your list after a pop up confirmation (for signing the change and verifying the URI obviously).
Relays for normal people are super confusing, and requiring people to go change explicit settings to have a good experience on nostr is going to turn off a huge number of users, imo.
nostr:note1qpykj8mljjgy7sy7eunufjtveegnczx78jyn898n2wpv48uq4dkqyrpds6
This story is absolutely bonkers and keeps getting crazier. This will very likely create a wave of alternative hardware/devices and potentially bring back the hacker mentality. Honestly this scares the ever loving shit out of me because I do not for one second believe our govt wouldn't use this, even covertly, to attack its domestic "enemies."
I can't help but look at my phone now and wonder if they have a means of just making the battery burst into flames if the agency of evil decided it should.
I suddenly have a new respect for the coldcard's choice to have the casing transparent!
https://i.nostr.build/LgHzzJqip7YuDYCL.png
Yes I’m aware of that, but there have also been leaks suggesting that there were ways CIA and co used to trigger battery fires in devices in the past as well. It just made it very real that they would be more than willing to do that if they considered certain people inconvenient enough and I now can’t help but wonder if they can literally just do that on the same way they can use Pegasus to just completely own any major platform mobile device.
Moonsettler explains a clarification that I had misunderstood in how statechains work.
Explained along with @pkt's analysis on other soft fork proposals for covenants and #Bitcoin improvements.
https://i.nostr.build/1PDLomshhLJPUANt.png
I knew the collusion with the operator in a statechain was the major trust trade off, but wasn't sure the specifics regarding the unilateral exit. So the trust is simply that the operator is honest in not altering the order of the valid transactions by colluding with a previous person in the transaction history (which could also be themselves obviously)
https://fountain.fm/episode/ejj7Ll2L5L0ZmRuQj2ux
As a key representative of the World Elite Podcaster's Union I hereby apologize for what I have done to you. This specific detail being slightly incorrect during a general discussion of many L2 designs and trade offs is an offense I will have difficulty recovering from. I shall refrain from any conversation that may in the future give you reason to look down on the podcasters of the world. We will be getting the global committee together upon the new moon in order to right this great injustice. 🫡
I have failed you all.
https://i.nostr.build/8LZZduVMhe7qbWOB.png
Since this meme was just made illegal in California, I feel it would be an injustice not to post it on #nostr where ti can breathe the free internet air.
This is a perfect example of pure, unstoppable Streisand Effect 🤣
By MrReagan on X
https://v.nostr.build/PMV1ixx1gjMCJ6YD.mp4
Get mad at some relays that are in their jurisdiction and maybe go after them. Or if someone posts it from cali maybe? Not sure, it would be hard for anything to stick I imagine, but I don’t doubt they would try something.
I've decided I'm going to keep engaging on Twitter, BUT I'm going to screenshot their post, respond to it here on #nostr, and then link them to the response 🤣
Yes it's a little clunky and slow. But I have chosen to only engage on #nostr where the response belongs to me. And it forces them to come over here to continue our conversation.
A short story on why ETH is dying and will continue to do so:
First, why on earth does the ETH crowd work so hard to be the cringiest thing in the world?
Second, ETH is stagnant because they sold their token on a bunch of "revolutionary hullabaloo" and literally the only thing with a meaningful market turned out to just be token gambling during the hype cycles. The growth was always on the "next thing" that was gonna "break open the floodgates" of the whole world running on the ethereum VM, but it never came and there was never a use case that really mattered.
The value case for Bitcoin was always just fixing the money. ETH thought it was literally going to replace the entire internet with a giant, slow AF, expensive, poorly secured and completely unnecessary consensus system because the whole world would financialize everything arbitrarily, and literally sold people on that idea. Apparently all of the same things, "BuT WiTh tOkENs!" that inject pointless volatility, liquidity problems, and that were all centralized anyway, was somehow a "groundbreaking" idea.
-- Bitcoin realized that the problem was the gross OVER financialization of the world, and the pointless gambling of the fiat financial and political apparatus that had caused staggering imbalances and trillions in misallocated and wasted resources. All resulting from shitty, cheap, endlessly manipulated money. It sought to END it.
-- While ETH didn't even understand that as a problem. To the contrary, it sought to EXPAND the over financialization of everything into every last corner of the world and into every market that it hadn't yet ruined.
It only hung on for as long as it did because it had a "roadmap" and everyone could just point to a date in the future where it would suddenly get better and fix all the problems. It was the iceberg build, then the avalanche merge, then the deep freeze, or whatever stupid name they came up with for the15 stages of their 1 year plan that stretched out a decade, that finally culminated into the conversion to a PERMISSIONED proof of stake system... and it was all just a giant "meh."
It's now even more convoluted and less secure, and essentially for the sole purpose of appealing to the "cult of fixing the weather." And still to this day, they survive on the last vestiges of token gambling, but increasingly people are finding out that theres no long term market to gamble on stuff that has no purpose to begin with, except to simply gamble with money. Adding arbitrary tokens just makes it worse. Slot machines are far simpler and serve the purpose perfectly. And if the tokens aren't going anywhere, then there is no way up, and if the token gambling isn't going anywhere, then what does ETH even do except suck at the one thing #Bitcoin has done since the beginning? Be reliable, trustworthy, open, and incorruptible money.
#Bitcoin sught to undo the destructive disincentives of the fiat world. While ETH tried to "technify" all of those bad incentives by tokenizing it all on the blockchain, without ever understanding what any of it actually meant.
--------------------
Financialization for the sake of financialization is so completely missing the point. That is always what "crypto," with ETH as the cringe father of it all, really represented.
The slow, drawn out fall of ethereum was easily predicted.
nostr:note1txflur2zcx2j92acjmx7xljm9a2t7sw9tj62qgx94rz6fdn47h2sk4a5ej
All utility tokens are just promises of some arbitrary, singular utility that will be "trapped" behind the use of the token itself. In how it was framed and used, I think "financialization of everything" is the best way to describe the crypto thesis.
https://i.nostr.build/2o9nTwWwDhsMmkM0.png
A short story on why ETH is dying and will continue to do so:
First, why on earth does the ETH crowd work so hard to be the cringiest thing in the world?
Second, ETH is stagnant because they sold their token on a bunch of "revolutionary hullabaloo" and literally the only thing with a meaningful market turned out to just be token gambling during the hype cycles. The growth was always on the "next thing" that was gonna "break open the floodgates" of the whole world running on the ethereum VM, but it never came and there was never a use case that really mattered.
The value case for Bitcoin was always just fixing the money. ETH thought it was literally going to replace the entire internet with a giant, slow AF, expensive, poorly secured and completely unnecessary consensus system because the whole world would financialize everything arbitrarily, and literally sold people on that idea. Apparently all of the same things, "BuT WiTh tOkENs!" that inject pointless volatility, liquidity problems, and that were all centralized anyway, was somehow a "groundbreaking" idea.
-- Bitcoin realized that the problem was the gross OVER financialization of the world, and the pointless gambling of the fiat financial and political apparatus that had caused staggering imbalances and trillions in misallocated and wasted resources. All resulting from shitty, cheap, endlessly manipulated money. It sought to END it.
-- While ETH didn't even understand that as a problem. To the contrary, it sought to EXPAND the over financialization of everything into every last corner of the world and into every market that it hadn't yet ruined.
It only hung on for as long as it did because it had a "roadmap" and everyone could just point to a date in the future where it would suddenly get better and fix all the problems. It was the iceberg build, then the avalanche merge, then the deep freeze, or whatever stupid name they came up with for the15 stages of their 1 year plan that stretched out a decade, that finally culminated into the conversion to a PERMISSIONED proof of stake system... and it was all just a giant "meh."
It's now even more convoluted and less secure, and essentially for the sole purpose of appealing to the "cult of fixing the weather." And still to this day, they survive on the last vestiges of token gambling, but increasingly people are finding out that theres no long term market to gamble on stuff that has no purpose to begin with, except to simply gamble with money. Adding arbitrary tokens just makes it worse. Slot machines are far simpler and serve the purpose perfectly. And if the tokens aren't going anywhere, then there is no way up, and if the token gambling isn't going anywhere, then what does ETH even do except suck at the one thing #Bitcoin has done since the beginning? Be reliable, trustworthy, open, and incorruptible money.
#Bitcoin sught to undo the destructive disincentives of the fiat world. While ETH tried to "technify" all of those bad incentives by tokenizing it all on the blockchain, without ever understanding what any of it actually meant.
--------------------
Financialization for the sake of financialization is so completely missing the point. That is always what "crypto," with ETH as the cringe father of it all, really represented.
The slow, drawn out fall of ethereum was easily predicted.
nostr:note1txflur2zcx2j92acjmx7xljm9a2t7sw9tj62qgx94rz6fdn47h2sk4a5ej
I didn’t even know what Lnhance was so I didn’t have an opinion on it. But the combo of CTV + CSFS seems like a powerful one from rather simple primitives that could open up a lot of constructions. Still don’t know enough about it to judge yet, but I’m already in general support of CTV
"Never work hard for something that someone else prints an infinite amount of for free."
"Do you think it would be valuable to have a system of money where you knew, without question, that the rules were exactly the same for every participant. No matter it a powerful government or an everyday citizen?"
"Have you ever heard of a "fad" or a "bubble" that collapsed and then went on another aggressive growth phase that dwarfed the previous one 5 times in a row over a 15 year period?"
"Do you think its better for money to have someone who can arbitrarily create and control every aspect of it because there's an institution in charge, or do you think it should be a public good with the same rules for everyone?"
--------------------------
These are ones that seem to trigger fresh thinking in people who are dismissive about it. It often forces them to see it a different way. What tact you use though will very much depend on the framing that the person you are talking to is coming from.
I completely disagree. The simplest way is to just take your keys off your device and I’ve never felt any need to “keep up to date” and replace a hardware wallet. Every one I’ve used in the past that I liked I still use in some capacity. Getting your keys off your mobile or desktop is an absolutely crucial step to securing your bitcoin.
Nah, if i want to have multiple wallets based off of a single hardware wallet I will often do it via multisig (Nunchuk makes this dirt simple) and adding a separate second key for it, or I use a 25th word to generate a new wallet. But I haven't done that in quite some time however. I mostly use various multisig setups with differing levels of security and ease of access.
"Bitcoin is much older than Hardware Wallets and the wallets in the past was also super safe."
I don't know how you think this is an argument for anything, but as someone who has been using bitcoin wince 2011 and has lost keys on a desktop wallet from "before hardware wallet days" I also, very much disagree. You won't convince me otherwise. I didn't come to this conclusion because I read somebody's tweet. Its from 13 years of using, failing, trying, testing, and gaining experience in bitcoin.
You are free to do whatever you want with your bitcoin keys. Thanks for the opinion though.
I still completely disagree, there are not more risks with a hardware wallet, and I don't know how you have reached that conclusion. Any basic assessment of common attacks and their likelihood, let alone a basic assessment of how people have lost their bitcoin, would demonstrate this very easily. An no, losing your backup seed is not a hardware wallet problem, its a self custody concern now matter what way you do it. So pinning that on hardware wallets as unique is not useful or accurate. You can just as easily lose your backup to a mobile wallet (which also happened to me once due to a dead phone)
supply chain attacks are a tiny concern if you are buying from the manufacturer and you buy a hardware wallet that specifically considers that a risk. Let alone simply doing a tally of how many times this has occurred, which is almost nonexistent except for people buying outright scam wallets or second hand off of ebay or something.
Then you have reached a conclusion that I haven't and we are at an impasse. The seed phrase issue is correct, but 100% irrelevant because it exists literally with every single option you go with. It's much easier to know you've secured it when its created entirely offline and never touched an internet connected device and has been properly backed up. But the issue is identical with or without a hardware wallet
The only thing I miss about Twitter was my favorite way to make morons and lunatics quietly go away:
Block them, and then immediately unblock them.
This would make them unfollow you without them knowing. So they wouldn’t see your content anymore. It was a wonderful tool.
Then they know and they will just move to their other account and keep screenshotting or posting. The above method was totally stealth. They almost never noticed. I would casually check back sometime after a few days and every single one stayed unfollowed. They never saw it.
“Quietly” is the keyword. If I wanted them to know I’d have just blocked them. But that makes morons even angrier and they almost always just return in some other way with a new vendetta against you
Get it off the exchange. Take the time you need to feel comfortable, but if it’s a life changing amount of money, learn how to secure it yourself without question.
My advice is get Nunchuk and a hardware wallet. Coldcard is solid, I also love tapsigners as a second key.
I wasted a whole hour on Twitter by accident this morning and the entire place is just disgusting vitriol and politics.
I’m coming here to apologize for what I did to myself and know that I will do better. Worst possible way to start the day honestly.
(It appears either my current Brazil ISP has stopped blocking Twitter IP or that Twitter has gotten around it maybe, but it was connected and isn’t currently blocking anything)
He has a hinged device up the back of his left leg and op to his butt that attaches to a platform under the rug. The hinges lock so that they only bend so far. Thus, he “sits down” on the arm after it won’t hinge any further.
[Sets VPN to Brazil]
Twitter: doesn’t load
#Nostr: works the same as always
I actually did this to keep myself off of Twitter and to give more Brazil VPN traffic for their govt to sort through, but it also just kinda hit me how important of a difference that single thing implies.
I also realize that Nostr could be even better, more resilient, and more censorship resistant. I think it will be, and I hope to have something one day to meaningfully contribute to that.
Not the same problem. Seems like it because the app and the service are the same with X. But I can’t go to the *web* version of X. Their IP is banned. Nostr and the apps people use are separate things.
If they tried to do that with a popular relay, nothing would change for basically anyone. If they ban the app from the AppStore, you can still just use the same account and relays in any web client.
I’ll probably do a month to test it out. I ‘m also looking at the open source AgentK, which appears to do something kinda similar by layering on a few different models & tools together.
Aliens
Saw that movie when I was 10 years old and thought it was the coolest thing I’d ever seen.
Then many years later I kinda worried that it would suck since I was older and had seen countless other films and didn’t have the “10’year old watching an R movie” novelty. Nope, still an absolutely phenomenal film.
It’s rare for a sequel to vary so much from the original, but still feel part of the same series. Aliens did it incredibly. And they also did a great job of raising the stakes and level of conflict in a way that felt genuine rather than forced. That’s so hard to get right in a sequel. It’s almost always either a not necessary repeat of the first with some new elements, or so exaggerated in an effort to be new/bigger that it feels cheap and derivative.
Alien: Fighting an alien
Aliens: Fighting the entire hive
Then everything after that seems to have suffered from the standard problems of sequels. (Caveat: haven’t seen anything past covenant)
Something I’ve noticed since I lost Phoenix wallet, is that our ability to communicate or “partner” between projects is kinda horrible.
Example: One of the best ways to get new users sats without any onboarding friction have been services like Fountain and Zebeedee. Yet literally none of the wallets will read or accept a withdraw from those services. Phoenix was the only one that would just do it.
Then the same problem with Cash App, which is easily a dominant service for buying and using #Bitcoin and now #Lightning. Yet none of my wallets will let me enter in an amount if the invoice is for zero sats… which all Cash App invoices are blank.
I thought these would just be growing pains about a year or 2 ago, but neither have changed at all in that time span. Are the wallet builders just not using their own wallets?
(I’ve had a super shitty day so if this is overly critical I apologize, but for lightning to also be a pain in my ass today is just icing on the cake. I’ve tried 5 different wallets and 2 different UI for btcpay trying to get a simple withdraw from Fountain to work)
As @supersu said, this is purely a consequence of persistence not yet built in across sessions. The manager for multiple connections itself is actually only like a couple weeks old 😆
This is all pretty brand new, so expect updates that keep making it better. I’ll keep doing what I can to push it along as well. I know lots of people who are working to make this all much easier and more ubiquitous. I think there will be a point in the coming year where enough has finally reached a stable production level that this starts to proliferate really quickly. Then comes the time where we can easily connect any and all of our devices together for any reason, and it seems weird that it didn’t just always work like this.
I don’t know the details well enough to explain it, but it’s got something to do with a rapid two-way port guessing game to trick your way through the firewall because both sides are participating. Mafintosh tried to explain it but I couldn’t follow exactly. I just have found that it seems to work every time, it connects really fast, and everything suggests nobody is running any specific server and that I’m not connecting to any in order to make it work.
The only thing I’ve seen is that some people behind really unusual combo of business networks, firewalls and VPN have reported some issues before, but I’ve not experienced it personally. In fact it’s the only thing that still works even if both of my machines are on separate VPNs. RustDesk, which has a central server, fails to connect when my Linux is behind a VPN.
Oddbean new post about login | logout
Notes by TheGuySwann | export