@deefouren I empathize. It has been a series of challenges for me as well. But your reply to me with threats was not acceptable. I’m sorry but that is not ok. Godspeed.
@deefouren You got farther than I did. I never made it to any kind of residency. It was denied. Worst case you’ll fall back to being a tourist like me 🤷♂️
> Vaults are cool and may be used by some, but the kinds of folks who used ColdCard were definitely not going to use them, sorry.
The hubris on display here is wild. There are highly ergonomic self-custodial experiences possible with vaults - different possibilities with different trade-offs per user preference (i.e. only require a cell phone and exchange acct. for fallback/watchtower? or do you want your own fallback ultra-cold key + self-hosted watchtower with no custodian collaboration? what time thresholds are you comfortable with? etc.)
For you to rule them all out on behalf of a wide swath of bitcoin users is crazy. It doesn't even seem like you have a good understanding of what the UX would be. I hope people have the good sense to take you less seriously in these conversations as a result.
We're donating 0.21 BTC to @craigraw and 0.21 BTC to the Bitcoin Red Team for their responsible security disclosure of the recent critical vulnerability.
In addition, friends and supporters of the BTCPay Server project have committed to funding a bounty to recover the stolen funds.
The bounty will be 10% of the amount recovered, up to a maximum of 3 BTC for full recovery of the funds.
These are modest contributions, but they are what we can offer as a FOSS project and a way to appreciate people doing critical security work, which helps the entire ecosystem.
To anyone with actionable information that could lead to a recovery, including the attacker, please contact: [email protected]. Signal and other secure communication channels can be provided upon request.
If multiple reports contribute to the recovery, the bounty will be split in coordination with the victims, based on the amount each victim lost, the funds recovered, how useful the information was to the recovery efforts, and other relevant factors.
Hash power was directed exactly as the miners configured it. Ocean did not commandeer hash rate from its users. A small amount of non-Datum users continued on the BIP-110 side and used Ocean templates after the split. Ocean feels that some of them may have not gotten the message or been confused about how to configure their miners to be on the main chain - admittedly, that could have been done better clearer by Ocean although there are challenges since Ocean is a non-KYC pool. So, in case there was an issue, Ocean is proactively making sure that they don't suffer any financial harm, hence the payment.
Note that the majority of the Ocean's team was not supportive of the BIP-110 chain. I realize that the external appearance may have been otherwise but there were plenty of eyes on this looking to make sure all was done properly.
My guess is this was an internal conflict due to the hardcore 110 proponents in Ocean unfortunately thinking the ends justify the means, as they have done from what I could see since proposing the BIP last October.
I’m glad Ocean has righted it and hope that cooler heads will prevail there going forward.
I'm not claiming a clever solution that saves bitcoin. Stop pretending I am / we are. Maybe then we can have a reasonable conversation.
No other soft fork in history has ever been required to "save bitcoin" to be a good idea.
What I am claiming is that BIP448 and BIP443 or similar dramatically improve the self custody landscape, and that if they had been deployed soon after taproot (yes, I know they didn't exist at the time) the coldcard hack would (with near 100% certainty) have resulted in less loss of funds because many of the same users who chose coldcard single signature would have chosen a vault solution based on these.
They would with 100% certainty make bitcoin better money and should be deployed to that end.
That's all I'm saying. I'm not trying to "save bitcoin" or claiming to have a magic bullet. Just make things better. And your false representations and half-understood counterclaims are directly standing in the way of improving bitcoin. Things don't have to be perfect to be better, and they don't have to be perfect to be worth doing.
@cbspears@sethforprivacy I think that's too broad. DATUM users were not affected, and we all saw a non-110 Ocean hasher win a block during the fork. This was either a mistake or poor judgment / a bad call from the top. My guess, anyway.
@A86664949@bergealex4@ocean_mining I’m not in a tribe and don’t have any sympathy your tribal mud-throwing. Don’t jump in with that nonsense and don’t expect not to be called out for it.