@PalmerLuckey The hypocrisy is there and you are right to point it out but this doesn't justify the USA actions with sanctions and limiting starlink and intelligence
@peterktodd@Ledger_Support To be fair its fairly easy to reseal the packaging to mimic a sealed pack and security sticker. Ideally you just need more layers of security including security stickers and transparent HW wallet cases so you can inspect the chips without opening the hw wallet
@NodiMend It depends how much smoke is created and yes , "coal rolling" can be illegal in certain places and certain amounts. If you are alone on the highway , fine , but if there are cars behind you they could get in an accident
@alpacasw Like Bcash, they will likely try and co-opt the brand of Bitcoin and claim they are the real Bitcoin for user confusion . My guess is "Bitcoin Gnosis" , but the rest of us will call it something like lukecoin
@peterktodd@blind_via You need over 2k drones for good resolution and yes combining fireworks launched from the drones helps like this example - https://t.co/oNPH2e34Pb
@wtogami Even if your neighbor is not malicious beyond stealing bandwidth,once they are exploited with malware their attacker might use your network to attack you as well. Additionally, I would be concerned about any future illicit sites/images being viewed that can place you as a target
@JuanSGalt@nvk Liquid has Confidential transactions already , which is a large improvement but I think the main reason no one has wasted the effort is the low liquidity on liquid and because its easier just using lightning for privacy
@Loic_Pandul@gladstein Most people do not label the addresses as thats an added UX headache; also labeling in a wallet adds to some other privacy concerns. UX is deeply interconnected with privacy and security in many facets
@Loic_Pandul@gladstein There are other reasons SP is a privacy improvement even if you don't reuse addresses.Say you give out an address to someone for payment and they never use it or delay using it, you go to your wallet and the same unused receive address is there to give to another which is a leak
@mork1e Its not bad , you can get 30 usd in free btc without buying their hardware wallet , I just tested it . Buy 10 usd in btc get 5 usd free in btc , spend btc , get 25 free in btc
@w_s_bitcoin@jack Its not bad , you can get 30 usd in free btc without buying their hardware wallet , I just tested it . Buy 10 usd in btc get 5 usd free in btc , spend btc , get 25 free in btc
@lurkaroundfind@RokoMijic We have no idea whose UTXOs those are (stopping repeating sloppy journalism) , nor should it matter as we can secure those UTXOs without confiscation even if there is no action upon from owners
@lurkaroundfind@BitMEXResearch There are multiple solutions , one being a soft fork, to secure those UTXOs without confiscation. Freezing does not necessarily mean confiscation and can be redeemed by those original owners
@mattkratter@zndtoshi That would be foolish as it would open a backdoor where developers could be coerced for social reasons to make ignorant technical changes that made Bitcoin worse or create a precedent where Bitcoin was not a neutral protocol
@mattkratter @kangdangPHD With a UASF you need almost every node to switch software otherwise you will create a chain split if you reject a block. We already went through this in 2017 and you should know better which is why soft forks typically have 80-90% req. MASF instead