Marco

4 months ago

@0xB10C @fanquake But spiders have 8 legs and ants have 6 so it’s probably fine

macrohead7 retweeted

7 months ago

Bitcoin Core v31.0 was released! It is available from: https://t.co/WpMuMaejz1 Release notes: https://t.co/f7i5N0YSal

166

464

123

138K

macrohead7 retweeted

🐍FAMU Alumni 💸Investor 💻IT Specialist

10 months ago

Bitcoin Core v30.2 was released! It is available from: https://t.co/WpMuMaeRoz Release notes: https://t.co/TEOTjoLnM7

149

32K

Who to follow

@mctweet770

❄️⛷️ ⛳️ 📈 🏈 Go Dawgs!

Henry Ray

@DougCli13776839

For The Love of The Game

@Stay_Coolin785

10 months ago

@fanquake @lightcoin Really good diagram

macrohead7 retweeted

10 months ago

NOTICE: Wallet Migration bug present in Bitcoin Core wallet 30.0 & 30.1. Under rare circumstances, migrating a legacy (BDB) wallet can delete all wallet files on the same node. If those wallets aren’t backed up, this can result in a loss of funds. A fix will become available in Bitcoin Core 30.2. Until that is released, do not migrate legacy wallets using 30.0 or 30.1. Only the legacy wallet migration process is affected. All other uses are unaffected. You can continue using Bitcoin Core normally, including existing wallets and running a node without wallets.

182

487

193

105

265K

about 1 year ago

Here is some software that arrives at a ledger according to a protocol

about 1 year ago

Bitcoin Core v30.0 was released! It is available from: https://t.co/WpMuMaeRoz Release notes: https://t.co/BifOfRyaq4

385

733

188

404K

559

macrohead7 retweeted

about 1 year ago

Bitcoin Core v29.1 was released! It is available from: https://t.co/WpMuMaeRoz Release notes: https://t.co/D6pxyCSBPj

203

249

82K

about 1 year ago

“trust yourself and your ability to reason about the world and real-world consequences" tech

Bryan Bishop

@kanzure

over 1 year ago

do you mean: do they serve my interests, who's interests are they serving, how do I evaluate if they are serving my best interests (regardless of whether they are obligated to or not (btw, if they have no formal legal obligation to your interests, then I would submit that Conflicts of Interest are inapplicable here)). Unfortunately this is extremely hard to evaluate and requires individual due diligence. So what some people do is they rely on others to help Interpret for them. But then you have to do due diligence on all the "helpful Interpreters" - social media personalities, podcast hosts, etc-- whose interests do those personalities serve? what is their incentive? Are they causing outrage to e.g. gain traction, subscribes, or attention? Is there any hope for people who cannot independently and productively reason about the world? One wrong click, and a phishing attack gets you? If your strategy is trust-based, then it might actually be a better strategy to use trust-based institutions (banks etc) because of the legal frameworks that have evolved around that-- it concentrates trust in the government or established legal system, which definitely has problems and does not always protect or act in any given individual's best interests, but it at least does provide a trust-based framework for trust-based navigating the world. By comparison, the bitcoin model isn't trust based and is much closer to "everyone is independently and individually responsible for evaluating Bitcoin source code and making a decision about whether they want to use this bitcoin code" -- there are no anointed governance priests in bitcoin... Yeah there's some positive reputation that has accumulated to some Bitcoin Core contributors, that's true, but to me that's something everyone ought to not rely on as a technical proof or signal - yes I know we are very social creatures haha. Even if every bitcoin developer in the world was extremely hated by the general public, no positive reputation whatsoever, I would personally still find bitcoin to be a very interesting project and still not appropriate to use trust based reasoning (although I might double check what all the hate is about just to see if there's anything new there!). Btw, being unable to apply the principles of social trust to bitcoin doesn't mean bitcoin is "trustless" tech, like YOLO just use it without checking anything as the only alternative to trust-based systems of socially perceiving reality, instead it's more like "you will have to trust yourself and your ability to reason about the world and real-world consequences" tech.

603

over 1 year ago

@calibrated_lies @GrassFedBitcoin @bitcoincoreorg I appreciate your wisdom

over 1 year ago

@LukeDashjr @GrassFedBitcoin @bitcoincoreorg I disagree that we’re on the verge of this experiment failing forever. To me that feels like hyperbole, that’s why I say I believe it’ll be okay

over 1 year ago

@LukeDashjr @GrassFedBitcoin @bitcoincoreorg That was not at all a shrug, just an acknowledgment that this thing is much larger than you and I and always will be. I very much would like Bitcoin to succeed as well

868

over 1 year ago

@GrassFedBitcoin @bitcoincoreorg Agreed, it would be a lot cooler if there was more monetary activity on chain How is it that 32406 makes the software more difficult to use? If you’ve already explained it precisely somewhere (maybe on the PR), feel free to point me there

296

over 1 year ago

@GrassFedBitcoin @bitcoincoreorg It’s possible, time will tell. I believe Bitcoin will be okay

over 1 year ago

@GrassFedBitcoin @bitcoincoreorg Ugh dammit you got me. How did you know?? That is 100% my intention and I cannot wait to singlehandedly burn bitcoin to the ground!

macrohead7 retweeted

over 1 year ago

A statement on Bitcoin Core development and transaction relay policy - https://t.co/K4AaPPqTSD

390

650

167

204

895K

macrohead7 retweeted

Michael Ford

@fanquake

over 1 year ago

Truly crazy that 10s of thousands of people, and trillions in capital, aren’t quickly and easily coming to unanimous agreement over changing a global protocol for value exchange. Could be a feature

234

39K