https://walletscrutiny.com https://nostr.info Working on Bitcoin, Nostr and being a good dad.
Leo Wandersleb @LeoWandersleb - 1d
So you post to unmoderated topics? And followers would see these cause they follow you but they can unsubscribe from the topic or jump into the topic to see all of it?
Leo Wandersleb @LeoWandersleb - 2d
Hmm ... the trailer looks intriguing (a genere I like: Zombies) but also a bit low quality with no hint at anything novel or deep. TWD in the later seasons completely gets away from being about zombies to being a post apocalyptic society building exercise with the protagonists trying to mimic the US institutions cause meh, whatever.
Leo Wandersleb @LeoWandersleb - 3d
Tell my daughter. She didn't want to go to Kindergarden today ;)
Leo Wandersleb @LeoWandersleb - 5d
I told my daughter to not trust strangers even or especially when they dress like cute animals or clowns but there was no stopping her.
I did not attend even though my 5yo wanted to go. I'd have had to babysit all the time and paid for 2 adults. She joined me last year and hadn't somebody lent her his wrist band I wouldn't have been able to even show her the main stage. She then fell asleep and I could watch the keynote with her in my arms. She loved the badger a bit too much for my taste 😬
Leo Wandersleb @LeoWandersleb - 6d
A 70 years old secret and nobody spilled the beans?
Leo Wandersleb @LeoWandersleb - 10d
nostr:npub1ye5ptcxfyyxl5vjvdjar2ua3f0hynkjzpx552mu5snj3qmx5pzjscpknpr I wonder why here the video defaults to English while on YouTube it defaults to German. I'm German. Did I set this preference in my browser or in YouTube? Should noStrudel do something so I can see it in German here?
Interviews like that usually start with networks desperately looking for people who would tell them shocking stuff on camera for money. He probably got $300 for the gig and looked into LLMs yesterday.
No senator would have had a better answer.
Leo Wandersleb @LeoWandersleb - 11d
"Israeli intelligence sources claim that senior Iranian security officials are either fleeing or preparing to abandon their posts and leave the country in the coming hours." sounds like BS propaganda. Picturing these senior security officials that tell the Israelies that they are about to leave their posts any hour now.
Leo Wandersleb @LeoWandersleb - 12d
When did he start depicting himself like the Supreme Leader of some banana republic? I wonder if a spook would do that or what it tells us about his state of mind.
Are you sure though? In my opinion, there is not much relays should innovate about. They are the rails. The pavement. Nothing fancy. The more they become fancy the more centralization we will get and while that might be in your interest, I don't see why it should be in my interest.
Leo Wandersleb @LeoWandersleb - 22d
So as you might have the answer ... I replied to the last two comments in my thread and my reply doesn't show up anywhere at all or how can I find it if it's held up in moderation?
Leo Wandersleb @LeoWandersleb - 25d
The commitment I'm talking about would be a commitment to send the funds to a specific address or a commitment to a full transaction. I see how an attacker could turn the funds unspendable if not implemented right but if the strong announcements (see other post) required valid, signed transactions I see no problem.
I took my idea to the mailing list and advanced it a little bit but I'm not familiar with posting to the mailing list, so what I'll post below, I posted twice and can't see in the group yet. The first was on the web interface itself, after which I couldn't find a trace of having posted at all and hours later it wasn't showing up (as approved by moderation) so I posted again using thunderbird. If there is any merit to the idea, I'd appreciate your reply on the ML I think the poison pill approach could be implemented as a soft fork after all, with a cleaner mechanism: After activation at block height X: 1. **Vulnerable UTXOs cannot be spent directly** - they require a prior announcement 2. **Weak announcement** with no private key needed: "I intend to spend UTXO A with transaction X after block B+144" 3. **Strong announcement** with a commitment proof: References a potentially old, pre-fork commitment and provides proof that this UTXO was included 4. **After 144 blocks**: The UTXO can be spent according to the strongest announcement (oldest commitment wins) This is a soft fork because: - We're not "undoing" transactions - We're adding new rules about *when* certain UTXOs can be spent - Old nodes still see valid transactions, just with different timing The key insight is that the "weak announcement" doesn't require private keys - it just declares intent. This preserves the validity of pre-signed transactions (they can still be announced and executed, just with a delay). Meanwhile, anyone who created commitments before the fork can use "strong announcements" to override potential quantum attackers during the window. This gives us poison pill protection while maintaining backward compatibility. No transaction reversal needed - just a new spending process for vulnerable UTXOs. Does this address your hard fork concern?
Leo Wandersleb @LeoWandersleb - 26d
There is no value judgement involved. Let me explain again: The poison pill would be "Satoshi creates a hash tree of transactions spending each of his UTXOs and put the root hash into an OP_RETURN. Now somebody spends his coinbase reward from block 12 using quantum computing or not but as we already activated this additional rule, Satoshi has 1000 blocks to tweak the spend. He publishes a transaction spending the same block 12 UTXO but with a reference to the OP_RETURN and all the missing hashes to recreate the root hash. This overrules the prior spend." The 1000 blocks waiting period is not immediately canceled as an older OP_RETURN could still overrule the newer one. After the 1000 blocks either the original transaction becomes spendable or the last replacement using the oldest OP_RETURN. The punishment is the loss of the work still required to "mine" the vulnerable UTXO. Sadly there is no punishment where the user hasn't taken the effort to create one such OP_RETURN but it would be much cheaper to protect many UTXOs than to migrate them all, which would help to get a high percentage of vulnerable UTXO poison-pilled.
How about a poison pill approach? What if UTXO owners could pre-commit to recovery transactions that can be mined if someone tries to spend their coins? During a grace period after any spend of a quantum-vulnerable UTXO, a pre-committed recovery transaction can be revealed to reclaim the funds. Attackers wouldn't know which UTXOs have this protection. As this would still leave the genuinely lost BTC up for grabs eventually and probably result in only a fraction getting protected while some would rather move their coins to post-quantum immediately, I'm still in favor of gradually retiring old UTXOs.
Yeah, but the counter strike in a MAD scenario is really all about getting out all the bombs to pre-programmed targets all at once. There is no surgical operation on moving targets behind the frontier.
Well, I wish I had your confidence. I figured that Chile isn't qualitatively more secure than Germany when MAD happens. Nuclear clouds from Ukraine suck. I was about as old as my daughter is now when we last had that. Either way I hope we can avoid that timeline.
Leo Wandersleb @LeoWandersleb - 27d
Having moved to Germany just a month ago, I clearly bet on no nuclear option being plaid here and I still think it's a big no-no. I was under the assumption that a retaliatory strike on a nuclear attack would almost exclusively be carried out by ICBMs and subs, not bombers that can be relatively easily intercepted by fighter jets.
