Over on Xitter, this guy had a lengthy thread about him getting hacked and losing a million USD in shitcoin wallets. He casually explained how a bunch of friends were sitting around his very computer the funds were on when he got a notifications about funds moving. His explanation is: I guess, Microsoft would want to know more about this. It would amount to some zero day exploit, right? Or would Microsoft just accept that this is how secure you are when using their product? Sure enough, the accused account was meanwhile locked by Xitter but something tells me this guy had terrible op-sec generally.

TIL: American English lumps punctuation into quotes if they happen to be near by 🤯 Or is the LLM just wiggling around to justify its weird punctuation placement?

Cornered men fight hardest. Kill filters, and every policy debate turns into a battle over consensus.

@hzrd149 I wanted to learn more about data vending machines but it's only namecheap selling me something at the provided link.

It's incredibly sad to see such low effort click bait on nostr - and some zapping this "car crash". No, @Luke Dashjr is not a bad actor (except for blocking me on Twitter, which he can't do here on nostr. Muahahaha). He's a bit special but was often right on things where my initial impulse told me that he was wrong and most definitely wants Bitcoin to succeed more than most anything else, so I would vouch for him not being a bad actor 100%. Is Luke being abused by a bad actor in this case? Is Mechanic a bad actor? I don't know. The debate about CSAM on the blockchain feels a bit like that. We had that debate many years ago, apparently nasty stuff is in the blockchain but my bitcoin tools don't show it to me and I wouldn't download tools that would parse the blockchain for images. The argument that you would need special software for the prior cases but not for the future cases is stupid as - guess what - you will always need "special software" to view images in something that's not purpose built for images. A "blk04169.dat" won't accidentally get opened with image software and with "special software" you can even find images in actual transactions that nobody put images in in the first place. To discuss filters in the context of what is legal in your jurisdiction is a slippery slope and can only harm Bitcoin. So do I stand with Core in this debate? Actually no, not yet at least. But luckily it's not that binary neither. I won't run knots but I won't update my full nodes any soon neither. Policy filters are a 🖕 to people abusing or attacking Bitcoin and node operators should not get policy filters taken away precisely to avoid this heated debate. Policy filters are an escape valve for things that some would like to see as consensus rules but can't quite convince all to go that route. Let people filter out big OP_RETURNs if they want to. Set the default to 100kB and see what happens. Welding close this escape valve was Core's error and now they get the heat. Yes, filters don't work but they send a message. Your dick pics are not wanted here. If Core wants them, let the individual miners at least send that statement clearly.

What can we do about address reuse? There are so many exchanges that give their users only one receive address ever. Even hardware wallet users often don't bother fetching their device to generate a new address ever. Sending to such addresses also makes the funds of the sender more trackable and ultimately bitcoin less fungible for all. Convincing people to use Bitcoin is hard enough but then to bother them to change their address for each transaction is such a hard sell. 😢 @GHOST