Token Daily

2

3

2 5

3

4

21 4

SwapzoneIO Tin 22 mins ago

This is a classic attack for ETH Classic. Who is HOLDing it?

1

cryptroop Platinum | QC: CC 139, ETH 42 | TraderSubs 30 1 h ago

Immutable chain reorgs

1

natufian Silver | QC: CC 85, DOGE 38 | IOTA 90 2 hs ago

I remember about a year or so ago about the time of ETC's first 51% attack, there was talk about exchanges potentially adapting automatic retaliatory mining to wrestle their funds back, to drive up the cost of such an attack (assuming the original attacker choose to persist) or to discourage this type of attack in general up to the value of the heist or beyond.

Obviously they haven't implemented this; does anyone know if they definitively decided against it or if they just put it on a back burner and may look into it again now that it's an issue?

1

drunkshihtzu2 3 hs ago

Still better than ripple.

2

Punchpplay Gold | QC: CC 42, BTC 15, ETH 15 | BSV 17 | Trader 6 hs ago

time to pump it.

1

neo-1000 7 hs ago

Lol..... Classic

3

areddituser46 Platinum | QC: CC 102 | MiningSubs 15 7 hs ago

Problem with relatively low power POW chains is that someone can rent massive amounts of power and 51% attack.

Take a look atnthis : https://www.crypto51.app/

Atm it cost $555k an hour to 51% attack Bitcoin, given you can source that hashpower.

2

cryptolicious501 Silver | QC: KIN 176, CC 108, ETH 33 | VET 38 | Tr 8 hs ago

Who actually invests in this coin...? Thats like the 4th or 5th time it's been hacked.

6

Fritz1818 Tin 10 hs ago

jeez, just throw the whole blockchain out already

1

Trollercoaster101 10 hs ago

I am definitely not gonna buy ETC anytime soon.

6

skewbed Programmer 11 hs ago

According to https://www.crypto51.app/, it only costs about $6,000 per hour to perform a 51% attack on ETC.

9

JTrader126 3 hs ago

well for what it is that site doesn't take other things into account To attack Dash the attacker would also need >50% of masternodes and that is many millions in USD. So that site isn't really accurate so I would take it with a grain of salt.

3

ebaley Gold | QC: BTC 752 | BCH critic 11 hs ago

At least it wasn't censored, eh, ETH?

0

TechCynical Platinum | QC: CC 227, BCH 85 | NANO 12 | r/Androi 10 hs ago

theres the cringe ass ebaley comment I havent seen in a bit.

6

1MightBeAPenguin Platinum | QC: BCH 195 11 hs ago

Something something glass houses and stones

1

GreenEyeFitBoy 12 hs ago

Who the hell is still holding ETC?

24

MediumAdhesiveness5 9 hs ago

Definitely Grayscale Ethereum Classic Trust https://grayscale.co/ethereum-classic-trust/

8

Owdy Silver | QC: ETH 494, CC 65, BTC 24 | IOTA 29 | Tr 3 hs ago

[Yuuup](https://twitter.com/barrysilbert/status/759110211718246400?s=19)

2

alex54321538 Tin 10 hs ago

Was looking for this lol

3

stake_pool Redditor for 1 months. 12 hs ago

Classic!

13

alicenekocat Developer 14 hs ago

You know it's bull market when a shitcoin pumps after a 51% attack.

2

The_Crypto_Economist 14 hs ago

I can't believe i was fully invested in this at some point.... Uhhh

1

PeakLL Gold | QC: CC 33 | r/FinancialIndependence 50 15 hs ago

PoS is better than PoW

5

necropuddi Gold | QC: ADA 17 | r/Investing 15 14 hs ago

I think the better way to put it is, there is only room for 1 PoW chain (any other chain that is smaller is susceptible to goldfinger attack)

10

-lightfoot Redditor for 5 months. 11 hs ago

Yeah, [btc is a shining example ](https://news.bitcoin.com/5-mining-50-btc-hashrate/)of security through trustless decentralisation /s Edit: so many downvotes, no actual counterargument. *is it a cult? o_0*

0

Darius510 Platinum | QC: CC 344, BTC 113, ETH 99 | r/pcgamin 4 hs ago

Because the counterarguments are so stupidly obvious that no one is even bothering to make them.

0

-lightfoot Redditor for 5 months. 1 h ago

Please enlighten this lower being with the highly obvious information about how PoW doesn’t inherently favour large centralised mining farms via economies of scale, and how that isn’t evidently manifesting (and increasing) in bitcoin

1

bryanwag Silver | QC: CC 209, PRL 17 | NANO 638 12 hs ago

The more accurate way to say it is there is only room for 1 PoW coin per PoW algorithm. You can tune your algorithm so that ASICs designed for Bitcoin or Ethereum have little advantage over GPU/CPU when mining your coin. RandomX used by Monero is such example.

13

donttouchmyfries 9 - 10 years account age. 500 - 1000 comment karma 11 hs ago

This 100%. These attacks have made me intuitively skeptical of all PoW coins that aren't XMR. The CPU bound RandomX and the decent "background" CPU miner built in to monerod make it more distributed. Pools and ASICs are bad. This proves it imo.

1

vegasluna Platinum | QC: ETH 201, CC 107, BTC 35 | TraderSub 14 hs ago

PoW has both spam and 51% atk vectors. its in its final days of providing blockchain security... ETH2 will make PoW obsolete early adopter technology.

0

necropuddi Gold | QC: ADA 17 | r/Investing 15 13 hs ago

I still think there's room for Bitcoin in the ecosystem in the long run as the digital gold (and not currency due to its inflexibility), just that the price will max out soon due to electricity constraints. 20-30k BTC is like Canada's electricity output at equilibrium, which I think would already be pushing the limits. Anything like 100k is just ridiculous (might top out at 100k briefly but it won't hold). You can't be using up China or USA's total electricity output on a bunch of ASICs and not have something go wrong (either government[s] intervention or just attack vectors flying at you from every direction).

0

1MightBeAPenguin Platinum | QC: BCH 195 11 hs ago

I think you're ignoring one of the biggest factors, which is how much value is also going to be transferred on the network, which adds value to the technology. Not to mention that Tether can print as many tokens as they want without fear of consequences.

1

Cryptoguruboss Gold | QC: BTC 327 | BCH critic 14 hs ago

Well we already have ada and guess what bitcoin is still no one... so no..

0

d_goddard XMR & XRP 16 hs ago

All the low-volume chains will die. The shocker is that they haven’t yet; it’s so cheap to rent 51% hashpower when maybe a few dozen bagholders are actually mining

68

hanmerhand Platinum | QC: NEO 246, MarketSubs 8 2 hs ago

That's why I favor dBFT consensus like NEO's

2

MartialImmortal Gold | QC: BTC 60 | TraderSubs 64 2 hs ago

"like"? who else uses it?

2

hanmerhand Platinum | QC: NEO 246, MarketSubs 8 2 hs ago

True that, FB's Libra was going to

1

immolated_ Gold | QC: CC 27, BTC 22 | TraderSubs 12 10 hs ago

POS chains will not

2

eosmcdee Silver | QC: CC 99 | NANO 109 11 hs ago

the more shocking is that its still listed in "reputable" exchanges !

11

aminok Platinum | BTC 1321, ETH 1101, CC 422 | TraderSubs 15 hs ago

There are only two high-volume chains. Ethereum at #1 and Bitcoin at #2: [https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EEwdR4uUwAA1Ycy?format=png&name=900x900](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EEwdR4uUwAA1Ycy?format=png&name=900x900)

0

UpDown 7 hs ago

Surprised to see lisk up there. Must just be all those delegates paying out their stakes to their voters

1

BananaBully Gold | QC: CC 35 | EOS 6 15 hs ago

Fees =! Volume, though of course BTC and ETH have the most actual volume.

17

fugofffffffff 5 hs ago

Do you actually expect a tryhard mEth addicted shill like u/aminok to NOT be disingenuous and outright dishonest? Fat chance

1

CarsonRoscoe Gold | QC: CC 33 | NEO 6 12 hs ago

There was a interesting metric I saw about taking a ledger, removing all transactions from exchange addresses, large transactions (bigger than $500k USD moved per transaction) and transactions going back and forth from the same addresses. By excluding these, you can exclude most of the ways blockchains "fake" volume. If you did this, you'd see Dogecoin has 5x the "meaningful" volume BCash has.

10

thebeesarebros 3 - 4 years account age. 100 - 200 comment karma. 10 hs ago

This is why I'm all in Doge

3

OkayTimeForPlanC Silver | QC: CC 43 | VET 67 13 hs ago

And VeChain...

0

MediumAdhesiveness5 15 hs ago

In this attack the hacker spend $200k to get over $5m

47

OCPetrus Platinum | QC: BTC 99 14 hs ago

But people on various forums have been saying for years that these attacks aren't profitable because the coins gained would immediately be worthless?!?

36

BasvanS Silver | QC: CC 389 | IOTA 498 | TraderSubs 159 12 hs ago

It seems they were wrong

26

vitriolic_amalgamati Platinum | QC: BCH 255, CC 49 | r/PersonalFinance 11 hs ago

Not enough people care to pay attention

10

AutoModerator 16 hs ago

Ethereum(ETH) Basic Info: Website - r/Ethereum - Abstract - History - Exchanges - Wallets

Biases(Updated July, 2019): Arguments For & Arguments Against | CryptoWikis: Policy - Contribute Content

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

CryptoMods Bronze Yesterday

Thank you for submitting to /r/CryptoCurrency,

Your post has been removed because there are already 2 posts about this coin on the front page.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

AutoModerator Yesterday

Ethereum(ETH) Basic Info: Website - r/Ethereum - Abstract - History - Exchanges - Wallets

Biases(Updated July, 2019): Arguments For & Arguments Against | CryptoWikis: Policy - Contribute Content

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

6 5

1 2

4

7

12

Francis Pouliot ⚡️ - @francispouliot_

"we will seek to invest up to another $250 million in [...] stocks, bonds, commodities such as gold, digital assets such as Bitcoin" "if you have large dollar values and you're hoping for any kind of return on them, that's faded. Gold, silver, and bitcoin are showing strength" https://t.co/IIySPyfnKu

0 5

Diogo Mónica - @diogomonica

“In addition, we will seek to invest up to another $250 million over the next 12 months in one or more alternative investments or assets which may include stocks, bonds, commodities such as gold, digital assets such as Bitcoin, or other asset types.” https://t.co/1V6rjffgrQ

0 2

Chris Burniske - @cburniske

RT @barrysilbert: "we will seek to invest up to another $250 million over the next 12 months in one or more alternative investments or assets which may include stocks, bonds, commodities such as gold, digital assets such as Bitcoin, or other asset types." https://t.co/QacnkEQJlT

75 357

Dan McArdle - @robustus

RT @MattWalshInBos: Somehow missed this last week. MicroStrategy, a $1.2 billion publicly traded company is diversifying its cash holdings to include Bitcoin 👀 https://t.co/n2qjWBeG2d

103 376

Mason & Co. - @masonic_tweets

RT @MattWalshInBos: Somehow missed this last week. MicroStrategy, a $1.2 billion publicly traded company is diversifying its cash holdings to include Bitcoin 👀 https://t.co/n2qjWBeG2d

103 374

Nick Szabo⚡️ - @NickSzabo4

RT @MartyBent: Publicly traded companies are starting to diversify their cash holdings into bitcoin. Boardrooms across the country will begin to ask, "Should we be diversifying into bitcoin too?" Hyperbitcoinization can happen faster than you can imagine. Be prepared. https://t.co/hRaMvr7Zdo https://t.co/t86fNIOgFr

69 231

Jon Matonis - @jonmatonis

RT @MattWalshInBos: Somehow missed this last week. MicroStrategy, a $1.2 billion publicly traded company is diversifying its cash holdings to include Bitcoin 👀 https://t.co/n2qjWBeG2d

67 247

Hunter Horsley - @HHorsley

RT @MattWalshInBos: Somehow missed this last week. MicroStrategy, a $1.2 billion publicly traded company is diversifying its cash holdings to include Bitcoin 👀 https://t.co/n2qjWBeG2d

57 217

Barry Silbert - @barrysilbert

"we will seek to invest up to another $250 million over the next 12 months in one or more alternative investments or assets which may include stocks, bonds, commodities such as gold, digital assets such as Bitcoin, or other asset types." https://t.co/QacnkEQJlT

7 60

Parabolic Trav - @parabolictrav

RT @MattWalshInBos: Somehow missed this last week. MicroStrategy, a $1.2 billion publicly traded company is diversifying its cash holdings to include Bitcoin 👀 https://t.co/n2qjWBeG2d

18 87

Marty Bent - @MartyBent

RT @MattWalshInBos: Somehow missed this last week. MicroStrategy, a $1.2 billion publicly traded company is diversifying its cash holdings to include Bitcoin 👀 https://t.co/n2qjWBeG2d

5 29

Pierre Rochard - @pierre_rochard

RT @MattWalshInBos: Somehow missed this last week. MicroStrategy, a $1.2 billion publicly traded company is diversifying its cash holdings to include Bitcoin 👀 https://t.co/n2qjWBeG2d

5 32

3

25 2

achow101 1 day ago

Hmm. I hadn't really considered that people would think this was an exploit. HWI basically abuses this "exploit" in the test suite (both automated and manual) because I can't be arsed to install the Bitcoin Testnet app. I just use the Bitcoin app and ask it to sign regtest transactions because they're identical to mainnet transactions.

Honestly, as someone who writes software that interacts with hardware wallets, having the device restrict the derivation paths it uses based on the coin makes everything so much harder and doesn't really improve security IMO. There are times when you want to use non-standard derivation paths and not being about to use them could break things.

Just as an example, when Trezor began enforcing standard derivation paths, they briefly broke HWI because it used a non-standard derivation path of m/0' to get a master fingerprint. This is used as a generic way to identify devices and there is no other way to get this fingerprint from a Trezor. When they automated tests began failing because of this, I had to inform them and they video to add m/0' to the whitelist. But my point is that there are uses for non-standard derivation paths and enforcing them can break things.

2

hashabc1123 1 day ago

I have BTC, ETH, and LTC on a ledger. What should I do?

1

undadatunda 2 days ago

i dont rust anything that has to be updated all the time..those updates are weak spots

1

uniagi 2 days ago

This thread should get much bigger exposure.

2

SIPFR3SH 2 days ago

noob question, is this repeatable for Ethereum/ ethereum based coins or is it limited to BTC and derivatives?

3

Fiach_Dubh 2 days ago

!lntip 100

1

lntipbot 2 days ago

Hi u/Fiach_Dubh, thanks for tipping u/gr0kch8n **100** satoshis! *** *[^(More info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/lntipbot/wiki/index) ^| [^(Balance)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=lntipbot&subject=balance&message=!balance) ^| [^(Deposit)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=lntipbot&subject=deposit&message=!deposit 10000) ^| [^(Withdraw)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=lntipbot&subject=withdraw&message=!withdraw put_invoice_here) ^| ^(Something wrong? Have a question?) [^(Send me a message)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=drmoore718)*

1

losh11 Litecoin Developer 2 days ago

Extremely disappointing to see the lack of action on Ledger's part. What did they think was going to happen?

2

LovelyTechno 2 days ago

Would this impact people who use the Electrum wallet with their ledger?

1

MrMantis765 2 days ago

Noob here, if I just hodl some LTC and BTC am I at risk? Should I move my LTC or BTC to a different wallet?

1

AirGap_Wallet redditor for 4 weeks 2 days ago

Instead of relying on hardware wallets, the most secure way is still to create a fully air-gapped setup.

1

NakeyDooCrew 2 days ago

The most secure crypto wallet is a sheet of paper with the keys written on it. People don't want to hear that because they like the feeling of security that only a mysterious gizmo can provide.

5

Ninjanoel warning, I'm a naive moron and I have the brain wo Yesterday

what do you do with those keys once you have them? maybe phone Indian tech support to move your crypto for you....? hardware wallets allow you to enter your seed into a dedicated device... that device can then be washed and the next customer may use it.

0

NakeyDooCrew Yesterday

The seed is just an invention of the hardware wallet though, right? I DCA my creepto on Binance or wherever is cool this month, send it to the paper wallet address and Hodl until further instruction. If I did want to sell it for some reason I'd set up a bitcoin node on a spare server and transfer it from there.

2

1MightBeAPenguin 2 days ago

That's not really secure. If it gets burned or is wet, you're done. The best is probably to back it up on 2-3 USB sticks, and then keep them in separate bank vaults.

3

ClubsBabySeal 2 days ago

Honestly stainless steel is probably the way to go.

4

chapelierfou 1 day ago

And of course it exists: https://coldbit.com/

2

GibbsSamplePlatter 2 days ago

supporting altcoins is the only mistake here

1

SHARPTRADING 2 days ago

What is the future of bitcoin? Its legit and safe??

1

6xbuZi redditor for 1 week 2 days ago

Just sent the email for a refund. Only had the nano x for a month and it already stole $10 of ethereum from me.

1

BrainDamageLDN 2 days ago

If one was to have negligible amounts of other shitcoins on their ledger (<$0.1), can they just delete all apps apart from bitcoin to remain safe?

2

bundabrg 2 days ago

Yes. Just reinstall them later to gain access. The coins are not on the ledger.

1

firstjib 2 days ago

Am I understanding this? I just got my ledger last week, and I did put litecoin on it. However, I put my ltc onto it before any btc, because I wanted to test it out. No ltc transactions were made while any btc was on the ledger. Does this mean I was not at risk?

1

MichaelEngstler 2 days ago

Ledger's behavior shouldn't surprise you, I had the same attitude and response while reporting a security vulnerability in the past. They only started taking it seriously once I publicly disclosed it.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/7uwc1z/using_a_ledger_wallet_you_probably_believe_youre/

2

ItsShowtimes 2 days ago

Altough this MIGHT technically not yet be a disaster, it definitely raises a lot of concerns for the long term. I will buy myself a Trezor instead based on this info alone. I am a security freak and know my way around and have been handling wallets by myself, but I do need to rely on a third party at some point, and it will be Trezor.

2

Coaster89 2 days ago

So wth! Should I not open any other apps on my ledger right now? Should I only open & use my btc app? Sounds like I'm getting a Trezor.

0

rocketeer8015 2 days ago

It’s simple. Remove all apps from your ledger apart from the official bitcoin app. And don’t install random apps from the internet **on your hardware wallet**. Also check addresses when you send crypto. Trezor has other issues. Like needing a 3rd party app to check or receive native segwit transactions or balances. Also this bug only affects you if you install 3rd party shit apps on your **hardware wallet**. Which you can’t do on the trezor. If you need these shit apps for your shit coin transactions trezor won’t do what you need. If you don’t need those wtf are you doing installing them on your ledger? Unless you are **accidentially** installing them on your ledger, in which case your crypto is probably far more secure on some exchange ...

1

Coaster89 2 days ago

I only have LTC & ETH apps on there & supposedly ltc is vulnerable.. I wouldn't call ltc & eth shit coins necessarily imho.. If i check addresses (which I always do) before confirming tx's I should be ok?

1

rocketeer8015 2 days ago

Yes, checking addresses helps provided you would recognise your btc address that’s holding your btc. The thing is that it’s not **the** LTC or ETH apps that are vulnerable(eth shouldn’t be at all anyway ...). You would have to install a new app. It’s a bit like installing a fake smartphone app. And that fake app would then claim it’s signing a ltc transaction while in reality it’s signing a btc one. It can however not fake the addresses, those would be the real ones. It basically relies on social engineering, get someone to install a new unofficial app on their ledger, preferably in conjunction with a 3rd party software apart from ledger live on pc side as well. For full effect you’d basically have to install 2 compromised unofficial softwares on two distinct devices and not check your addresses when sending.

0

monokh 2 days ago

You will not be ok with that scenario. Due to the exploit, you cannot trust what you see on your display if you are using an altcoin app (such as LTC). If it is exploited in your scenario, you will see a Litecoin transaction with a Litecoin amount and address that will actually send bitcoin once confirmed.

2

c_games_official 1 day ago

So if I had a malicious LTC app, the address will falsely display the LTC address I'm trying to send to but will actually be signing to a completely different BTC address? What is the difference between this and a malicious LTC app that is secretly sending your LTC to a different LTC address than what you are trying to send to?

1

Coaster89 2 days ago

Yikes- but the btc app is safe? Had Ledger addressed this formally? They're really dropping the ball.

1

monokh 2 days ago

This is ledger's technical description after the public disclosure: [https://donjon.ledger.com/lsb/014/](https://donjon.ledger.com/lsb/014/) Bitcoin and Ethereum should be safe. Avoid using the altcoin apps unless you know and trust 100% what the code communicating with the device is doing.

1

bitusher 2 days ago

Trezor is a great HW wallet but lacks a secure element so you need to make sure you use the passphrase feature for most of your savings https://wiki.trezor.io/Passphrase#:~:text=Passphrase%20is%20an%20optional%20feature,device%20or%20the%20recovery%20seed.

2

xXCsd113Xx 2 days ago

This. The only true replacement for a ledger is the cold card as they have a secure element. They only support bitcoin tho, Come on kastelo hurry up

1

DNAENCRYPTION_81 2 days ago

Seems like a myriad of issues lately with ledger. Own and haven't even used it yet because of all these issues that continue to come up. I'm sticking to my cobos and ellipal.

2

globzero 2 days ago

Awesome find, and with this being the 2nd long existing coin steal bug via compromised controlling device, I guess it's time to trash my ledgers and move somewhere else 🤔

2

rocketeer8015 2 days ago

The device isn’t compromised until you **choose** to compromise it. And skip the whole part of reading from where to where you send your coins which is a recipe for disaster anyway.

0

monokh 2 days ago

I think you misunderstand the vulnerability. You can be exploited without noticing while running official Bitcoin and Litecoin apps.

5

globzero 2 days ago

That is how I understood it. I get a test net tx to confirm, might not give a rat's ass about the destination. And my btc are gone. I don't have alts or test net on my Ledger, so I'm safe from this one. But the sheer existence of this bug scares me.

1

BismuthMoon 2 days ago

No shitcoin, Not effected

11

cryptosorrow 2 days ago

Ofc, this is bad but it's a software bug so it can be fixed

0

bitusher 2 days ago

yes, but hasn't in ~1.5 years while they focused on shitcoin support, this is not acceptable

4

cryptosorrow 2 days ago

Even bitcoin has security flaws: [https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Common\_Vulnerabilities\_and\_Exposures](https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Common_Vulnerabilities_and_Exposures) Why don't get a coldcard if you don't need "shitcoins"?

2

bitusher 2 days ago

I own one of almost every HW wallet already

0

hellomynameisfi 2 days ago

u/monokh was the disclosure date coordinated with Ledger?

0

lsdza 2 days ago

Read his website and the disclosure timeline

3

gr0kch8n 2 days ago

Ledger Response: https://donjon.ledger.com/lsb/014/

9

8 2

1 2

2

4 3

15 2

Mr-Sha256 Yesterday

Better get bitcoin while you still can...the window is always closing

1

buddykire Yesterday

It will go away eventually, because it is fundamentally flawed.

1

ArrayBoy 2 days ago

Someone needs to tell him about Nano!

/s

3

Eislemike Gold | QC: BTC 25, CC 16 | r/Investing 11 2 days ago

Jesus there is so much salt in This sub.

6

ILikeToSayHi 1 day ago

every 2 years noobs get cleansed then the comments in the sub are replaced by fresh alt bag boys

5

1Tim1_15 Platinum | QC: CC 182 2 days ago

itsn't it odd that the coin which lifts all ships gets so much salt? But if you want some upvotes, just say something good about ETH. That's really what this sub is.

8

Bigchrome 2 days ago

Confirmed: Republican's next insider trade will be Bitcoin

2

FailedPhdCandidate 2 days ago

They’ll just steal the bitcoin from all of us “legally”

4

daemoncluster 2 days ago

they did it with gold ~100 years ago

2

mollooo 2 days ago

Just keeps getting stronger...

1

milkonyourmustache 2 days ago

Hate/dislike Pomp but I do appreciate the work he puts in to spreading the word, he has a vested interest in doing so, we all do, but he really is helping to simplify the message and reach a broader audience.

Once the average person can quickly understand BTC, and the user experience advances significantly we'll get the mother of all surges in adoption.

10

parakite Yesterday

What makes you think pomp reaches the "average person"? He has a committed followers **in crypto**, who he reaches to. He's not cnbc.

1

BenjiKor Redditor for 3 months. Yesterday

just curious what your reason for hate/disliking pomp? genuinely curious.

2

fadetoblack123 2 days ago

Wide spread adoption will never ever happen with bitcoin or any other crypto currency. 2 reasons why. 1. Government. The US government is literally printing money as we speak. They will never ever give up on the US Fiat currency ever. As long as we have a government we will always have a fiat currency. 2. Wall Street. The day bitcoin became listed and Wall Street got their hands on it was the nail in the coffin for any viable main stream adoption. Sad buT true.

0

Robby16 Platinum | QC: CC 322, BTC 32 2 days ago

Ur new to being smart, you’ll learn.

3

cheese4brains 2 days ago

You don't actually give reasons, just "Government and Wall Street." Are you really saying government printing money is bad for bitcoin? This sub never ceases to amaze me.

10

fadetoblack123 Yesterday

Bitcoin is useless because of Wall Street. The blockchain technology associated is what’s really valuable bro.

1

cheese4brains Yesterday

Because of Wall Street...that’s not an argument. Blockchain is a buzzword. You clearly don’t understand bitcoin lol.

1

subwoofage 2 days ago

Says a guy with big hodlings?

1

Miffers 2 days ago

I wondered what Satoshi was thinking once the blockchain was first compiled.....

3

DaBears2DaShip Tin 2 days ago

This is great, adoption is coming guys!

1

tranceology3 Silver | QC: BTC 474, CC 277, ETH 57 | TRX 400 | T 2 days ago

This is great ~~adoption~~ my investment will go up. People couldn't care less for adoption if it was a stable coin.

1

SuperJew113 2 days ago

My dad was a strsight up G-man from the 70s and 80s. And his deal was strong moral fiber and character, minimalist corruption, ethical effective, responsible efficient government.

I told him if the US Government had been saturated with and ran by men like him for the past 40 years, I wouldn't balk at the US dollar and reserve currency status, US bonds and the FED. Becauss if it's ran sound and good, not too corrupt (there's always been corruption to varying degrees, today it's excessively bad), to me, that's the main backer for a Fiat currency that's not backed say gold/silver perhaps.

But that's not what happened. The government is being destroyed from the inside, the Treasury raided. The foxes have been given the keys to the hen house. Now I need some kind asset that performance as an asset class is actually relatively divorced from say the US going belly up in some manner.

And he agrees. He says our government especially in the past 40 years has increasingly been ran poorly, more partisanship, division, feelings on matters of public policy outweighs facts and the truth.

This is a country firmly in decline. And that's why he was skeptical of a cryptocurrency purchasing I was making, but even he says, an old school g-man/Vietnam Veteran horn rimmed glasses, a mind towards public service, and a haircut you could set your watch to (see D-Fens from Falling Down) he's like ok...yes this shit show is gonna get worse before it gets better.

34

zenrvn 2 days ago

Has been *run*. Ftfy

2

BitcoinMorpheus 2 days ago

Love this! Pops sounds like a boss

12

SuperJew113 2 days ago

You need it to attain a GS-13 pay rate in a not Washington DC city. He was had at times 30 employees under him. GS-13 same payrate as Lieutenant-Colonel in the Army, on the civilian side, and for a non-Federal Jobs hub that's a bit impressive. There was a really smart GS-15 above him made him look like a dumbass, he said he was the smartest man he'd ever met. I guess this is the purported "Deep State" and those who hate government and don't want government to function, they hate there are career driven meritocracy smart employees of the government who really don't need to be reelected who do what they can to make sure the government works politicians be damned. I'm flawed. A lot of people might tell you, they don't like me. But almost everyone has liked Dad. And Dad taught me this "government is the problem" shit is bunk. When you got smart, ethical, well ran, not corrupt, means tested, competent government working on and fixing a problem (for example he was on the Corp. Of Engineers during the 1993 Flood, the worst flood in the US in a full blown century) it's one of the most beautiful things you've ever seen. It works and it works beautifully, and for certain functions of government, privatization arguments are bullshit, private industry can't outperform, in some situations government service is vastly superior to Private industry profit. I think the old man is saddened to watch the country get dismantled from the inside. Back in the day he get up at 4am, leave at 5am, show up close to 6am on the commute...he'd get home around 5pm. And he looked like D-FENS quite a bit haha.

7

manic_schoolbus 2 days ago

I use to work a GS position, and it really is people like your dad taking the job seriously who's keeping all of this from falling into anarchy. There are quite a few just doing it for the steady pay and benefits counting days until they can retire and collect a pension check, but the ones who are passionate about it and do things strictly by the book really stand out among them.

1

Yorn2 2 days ago

Well, the problem is that the "Deep State" of the 70s and 80s was so much more different than the Deep State of the 00s and 10s. There was once a time when the great threat to our national security was the stability of the dollar and the men who served in the 70s and 80s and had dealt with the turblence in the 60s and early 70s leading up to the closing of the gold window knew that. This country went war crazy after 9-11 when we were previously so rational about how Vietnam and the war economy affected us. We need a return to the kind of sound money advocates that practically ran the FBI and CIA in the 70s and 80s and did actual gumshoe-like detective work instead of playing multiplayer spreadsheets in the financial realm and letting bankers go free for funding black market drug lords. We also probably need to see pot legalized nationwide and the drug laws changed into less of a war and more of a medial response. That's probably a harder pill for former G-men to swallow, but a necessary change I'd argue regardless. Any good analysis of what makes the cartels and such so strong is the fact that the black market money resides entirely in the hands of transport operations, and transport requires real estate, resulting in gun violence to protect both.

6

SuperJew113 2 days ago

You make good points. As the son of a proud Half-Life level G-Man, the G-Men often (Obviously not always) aren't the ones setting the policy, they're the one's enacting the policy as acting heads of government organizations with employees below them. And there are corrupt outside influences that are destructive against the America people having a functioning government in favor of a short term thinking privatized profit, that emphasizes am extremely privatized greed over service to the American people. It really saddens the old man. Government can be beautiful, he basically says don't hate government in and of itself, hate corrupt bad government, but not simply the mere concept of government. As the old man points out, take Mogidishu, you might have 10, 15 tribal warlords running thar stateless society. Or some, take Colombia, the cities are under one governing entity, the country side is under another, in a low intensity (but also very lethal) long term conflict. His point is, no where you go short of Bir Tawil, where there are groups of humans, there governments in some shape or another...even HOA's. So if you express loyalty to one or another, bare minimum everyone should like good government, and that line "the government that governs best, governs least" that's straight up bullshit, it's a nice sounding, focus group means tested sloganeering that effrctively tells people to dislike ethical well ran government to the advantage extreme corporate power and unaccountable private wealth. And yes...definitely legalize drugs. You're right, he was last in the family to finally get behind that, the results of criminalizing it is obviously far worse than any purported evils of these drugs he at long last had to admit, product of his times. I think you'd like my dad, he's got a solid head on his shoulders beyond imo 90% of people, he moved up the ranks because of his outsized competence.

4

CommercialTouch9 2 days ago

Hopefully Bitcoin will gain more political support as the monetary policy by goverments becomes more controversial

4

Newmovement69 Tin 2 days ago

Printer goes BRRRR..

8

AutoModerator 2 days ago

Bitcoin(BTC) Basic Info: Website - r/Bitcoin - Abstract - History - Exchanges - Wallets

Biases(Updated July, 2019): Arguments For & Arguments Against | CryptoWikis: Policy - Contribute

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

simplelifestyle 2 days ago

Nice, he is in a good position to help Bitcoin:

Congressman Tom Emmer was sworn in for his first term in the U.S. House of Representatives on January 6, 2015. He is currently serving his third term.

Tom was recently elected by his fellow Republican colleagues to join the House GOP Leadership team as the Chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee for the 116th Congress. Currently, he sits on the House Financial Services Committee. He is also a member of the Republican Deputy Whip Team and the House Republican Steering Committee.

Born in 1961, Tom grew up in Minnesota and attended St. Thomas Academy. He received his BA in Political Science from the University of Alaska-Fairbanks and his JD from William Mitchell College of Law.

After practicing law for several years, he opened his own law firm. The next 20 years were spent balancing family, business, coaching hockey, and serving on the city councils in Independence and Delano.

Before coming to Congress, he served in the Minnesota House of Representatives from 2004-2008.

He and his wife Jacquie have been married over 30 years and have seven children. They reside in Delano.

https://emmer.house.gov/biography

24

NickMize7 2 days ago

Just listened to pomp’s podcast with Tom very insightful. I hope more congressman learn the values of blockchain so we can create a better financial future for the world. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vxz1HFWWkPg

5

ArtigoQ 2 days ago

Oh they will dont worry. Just as soon as their financial advisors secure them a long position.

5

diydude2 2 days ago

I want to donate to this guy's campaign.

10

Mesozoic-66 redditor for 2 weeks 2 days ago

But more Bitcoin instead.

5

RammerRod 2 days ago

Why not both?

2

5 7

p1hk4L 2 days ago

Are multiple wallets better/safer than just one for long term storage

2

sonyalyynn redditor for 3 weeks 1 day ago

better to have a secured private key. Wallets don't necessarily have to be much

1

diydude2 2 days ago

I don't understand people who complain about "usability." What's so hard about hitting the big "SEND" button in your wallet and pasting/scanning in the address where you want it to go? It's a lot easier to use than a credit card, IMO.

0

whitslack 2 days ago

Those same (types of) people complained about the usability of email when they were first adjusting to it. ("You mean I have to remember all this '@' gibberish? Not usable!") Anyway, Bitcoin is going to continue to get easier to use. My prediction: tap-to-pay wallet cards are going to be the application that breaks the usability barrier. (Tap your wallet card once to see the proposed amount on the card's integrated e-ink display. Hold down a capacitive button while tapping the card again to pay the previously proposed amount. The card provides the necessary cryptographic signature to the payment terminal during the button-held tap.)

0

MustardCube 2 days ago

The major usability issue I see is backing up the keys and transaction times

2

bradley_cohen redditor for 1 week 2 days ago

Especially backing up a lightning channel. I'm not even sure if that's possible in the same way a regular wallet can be backed up.

1

AaronVanWirdum 2 days ago

I agree, but maybe read the article for details?

2

bitusher 2 days ago

Time to make another donation to HRF with lightning -

https://hrf.org/donate-bitcoin/

4

Shaffle 2 days ago

I don't see a way to donate with lightning on their page?

1

bitusher 2 days ago

yikes , i just donated with lightning not too long ago , looks like they just disabled that in btcpay , i wonder why as it will get them less donations

2

Shaffle 2 days ago

not sure. I had to use a service to convert lighting back to BTC. Getting BTC into a lightning wallet is really easy, but getting it back out is kind of a pain in the ass

1

whitslack 2 days ago

It was on a separate page before, wasn't it? Hard to find.

1

bitusher 2 days ago

no , with btcpay you toggle with a drop down list between paymt methods top right

1

Big_Gay_Bears redditor for 5 weeks 2 days ago

Good point but finding a way to scale transactions safely is more important.

0

bitusher 2 days ago

We already have found these solutions from eltoo, lightning, sidechains, and statechains. We just need this technology to mature , especially with UX which means this grant is perfect

8

notimeformorons redditor for 2 months 2 days ago

Usability (in the US) isn’t going to matter until the tax code is fixed. If every single purchase made with Bitcoin is considered a taxable event, keeping track of and properly reporting your transactions is going to be a barrier that users are not able or willing to overcome.

10

asap-bitcoin redditor for 6 weeks 2 days ago

If a law is unjust you are obligated to break it.

2

Annihilia 2 days ago

This is a separate issue and there's very little skillset /resource overlap. Usability improvements can be worked on in parallel with policy-focused folks doing their thing.

2

Gracket_Material 2 days ago

Sch bullshit. I don't get a tax write off for my losses on my USD from year to year, but I have to pay tax if I use a currency that just happened to go up compared to the shitcoin that is the dollar

1

whitslack 2 days ago

> I have to pay tax if I use a currency that just happened to go up compared to the shitcoin that is the dollar It's so much worse than that. You have to pay a tax when the shitcoin dollar *loses value* to inflation. (Inflation makes the dollar-denominated prices of everything rise, and the government charges you capital gains tax on that nominal rise.)

1

Gracket_Material 2 days ago

Thats what I mean by losses. The 20$ I earned last year is worth like $18 now

1

notimeformorons redditor for 2 months 2 days ago

I laughed at the absurdity of it, unfortunately it’s true!

1

Crypt0JAy 2 days ago

What about cash transactions with food vendors? I don't see them taxing me with my 6 tacos and bottle of squirt.

1

whitslack 2 days ago

Cash is not subject to capital gains tax, as it's the medium of exchange in which gains are calculated. (Your capital gains on cash are always exactly zero.)

3

Crypt0JAy 2 days ago

Okay thats why I asked. Thank you. So when interest is accrues is when they tax it ?

1

whitslack 2 days ago

At least under U.S. tax code, interest is taxed as ordinary income in the year in which it was paid. That differs from capital gains, which are taxed in the year in which they are realized. You realize a capital gain (or loss) every time you sell an asset, including bitcoin, even if you're selling it for something other than cash. For instance, if you sell your bitcoins for six tacos and a bottle of Squirt, you're realizing a capital gain (or loss) on those bitcoins, and that will be taxable. It sucks and isn't how Bitcoin sensibly ought to be treated, but that's currently the way it is.

1

Crypt0JAy 2 days ago

So I "realize" when using coinbase as a means of exchange for fiat? Everytime I file my taxes I dont mention anything of digital assets. How can they "get me" ? My BTC can be on a cold wallet for all they care. I just feel confident in avoiding all this. If so, am I doing something illegal potentially?

1

whitslack 2 days ago

When you sell bitcoins for fiat on Coinbase, that is a taxable event that the IRS claims you are legally obligated to report to them. Coinbase may report it to them as well. Only sales are taxable, not purchases.

1

Crypt0JAy 1 day ago

I often sell XRP , a cryptocurrency if you are familiar with it. Paypal seems like they would rat. Perhaps it is unwise to discuss openly in a public forum. Why? I have no intention of reporting that on my taxes fiscal year 2020.

1

whitslack 1 day ago

PayPal will send a Form 1099-K to the IRS on your behalf if you exceed certain transaction thresholds in any calendar year.

1

Crypt0JAy 1 day ago

Understood

1

maybeitsjustu 2 days ago

Moving and holding to a different wallet is not taxable. Selling or trading bitcoin for something else is taxable. The latest IRS forms ask only if you sold or traded away bitcoin. If you are holding you owe nothing.

3

Crypt0JAy 1 day ago

Very good. I shall hodl and stay put. Thank you for the information friend.

1

notimeformorons redditor for 2 months 2 days ago

Umm... sales tax...

1

Crypt0JAy 2 days ago

They don't. Thats my point.

1

bitusher 2 days ago

This is by design , governments want to decrease usability of Bitcoin. Rather than a futile petition they change this policy I believe a more effective approach would be to focus on privacy, liquidity and UX in DEXs like BISQ, and other areas of UX.

19

Hyetigran 2 days ago

Will there ever be privacy on the layer 1?

1

bitusher 2 days ago

Privacy is never absolute but a spectrum , Bitcoin already has many privacy improvements onchain. Payjoin transactions just came on within btcpay and taproot is on its way. To elaborate on the balance of tradeoffs with privacy - I would rather have higher degrees of privacy working on other layers like lightning, or sidechains(liquid CT) or wallets (Wasabi) than the base layer because: 1) The auditability of inflation and the 21 million limit is critical. All complex privacy crypto solutions may have undetectable bugs that lead to very difficult to detect inflation. With Bitcoin everyone can easily audit the chain. With certain privacy coins like monero their inflation resistance relies faith in the future of ECC security which might need to be upgraded in the future thus casting serious doubts on an inflation bug existing undetected. 2) It is important to give users the option of transparency and audibility onchain, at least for accounts they choose to expose. 3) In the future privacy coins will be the first to be banned and liquidity is super critical. There are good reasons why most DNM txs are still using BTC It is far more likely they outlaw or restrict privacy coins (because they choose to market themselves as a privacy coin onchain instead of just giving users the option of privacy on wallets and other layers) as you can see here https://archive.is/ZMAbo >"Secretary of State Pompeo seems to confirm that the cryptocurrencies the federal government is watching most closely are privacy coins. If so, Monero (XMR), Zcash (ZEC), and others may soon be in some hot water if they are not banned altogether." 4) privacy tech like ring signatures, CT, and zk-snarks has huge scalability tradeoffs and much higher resource demands leading to more centralization and greater inefficiencies. 5) cross-input signature aggregation incentivizes more use of coinjoin by making regular onchain transactions almost as small as regular transactions and lightning is designed to be extremely private from the get go. There is still an option to have transparency and give the allusion to regulators that they can track coins onchain however. 6) Coinjoin with a wallet is private enough, Look at what an employee of leading coinanalytics company says about coinjoin - Read this - https://removeddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/c4so58/i_am_a_current_or_former_employee_of_chainalysis/ >Initially, the difficulty was standard mixers (still are) but now I would say Wassabi is enemy number one. **There is no way to de-anonymize it, and I don't see how the government can legally take Wassabi down, so it will probably persist.** Put it this way, if everyone used Wassabi, Chainalysis would go out of business. note , this was anonymous leak so no way to verify comment came from actual former employee. 7) Here is a presentation on how Taproot can allow for UTXOs with untraceable swaps and indistinguishable payment channels. Taproot allows privacy txs to share the same anonymity set as regular onchain transactions thus eliminates the concerns with everyone forced to opt into a privacy Bitcoin wallet to have a larger anonymity set. https://youtu.be/TYkIyUaRG0s?t=7592 8) Privacy is a complex topic that has many nuances. Many privacy coins have lower tx fees(Bitcoin has lower tx fees on other layers) than Bitcoin onchain(mainly because they are hardly used and have low value) . Lower onchain tx fees can lead to the risk of very inexpensive attacks to deanonymize users as well. Bitcoin being designed where onchain fees will grow to cover the cost on security (and as explained privacy) and inexpensive txs occur on other layers(that are very private like lightning which is multihop and onion routed by default which makes coin analytics practically impossible) is the better balanced solution IMHO. 9) payjoin is a new way to become very private onchain and reduce the UTXO set while doing so , its already in btcpay https://blockstream.com/2020/04/16/en-bitcoin-privacy-improves-with-btcpay-servers-p2ep-implementation/

9

Bitcoin_to_da_Moon Yesterday

ty

1

almkglor 2 days ago

> Schnorr/MAST incentives most wallets to coinjoin because coinjoin txs become cheaper than regular onchain transactions and lightning is designed to be extremely private from the get go. This is a common but ***untrue*** claim. What makes CoinJoin cheaper will be cross-input signature aggregation. While Schnorr allows signature aggregation, cross-input signature aggregation was ***removed*** from the Taproot proposal (Schnorr+MAST+Taproot) in order to streamline it. Thus it will ***not*** benefit CoinJoin at all. And "cheaper than regular onchain transactions" is wrong as well. CoinJoins havemore inputs, and those inputs still have the same size of 32 bytes of txid plus 4 bytes of vout, whereas a "regular" onchain transaction would normally have just one or two inputs most of the time. CoinJoin will still remain larger! The only difference is that with cross-input sigagg the CoinJoins will be smaller than pre-cross-input-sigagg CoinJoins, but a regulare transaction that uses cross-input sigagg itself will be smaller than a CoinJoin with cross-input sigagg. >Coinjoin with a wallet is private enough There have been reports of exchanges locking accounts or not accepting incoming funds if they detect it as coming from an equal-valued CoinJoin, because equal-valued CoinJoins are low-hanging fruit and are easily detectable as such onchain. CoinSwap and PayJoin are much harder to filter. > payjoin is a new way to become very private onchain As you note, privacy is a nuanced topic. Payjoin assumes that the payer is someone the payee trust with the payee's privacy data --- it reveals a coin the payee unambiguously owns to the payer. So there is a privacy tradeoff here: the payee is revealing a secret to the payer in order to get privacy from everyone else onchain. In addition, payjoin is cheap, but it "only" gets a small amount of privacy, as the anonymity set is tiny (2: the payer and payee) at the advantage of steganography (chain analysis has to figure out it's a payjoin in the first place).

4

neonzzzzz Yesterday

> Thus it will not benefit CoinJoin at all. There is other potential benefit with taproot. Currently if one party of equal output coinjoin pays to some other output type (you can do that with JoinMarket), for example, directly fund Lightning Network channel, it decreases privacy. Taproot can solve that (of course, only when both CJ implementation uses taproot and receiver of direct send via coinjoin).

1

almkglor Yesterday

Yes, that is correct. Unlike SegWit v0, however, switching to Taproot does not give significant fee discounts compared to P2WPKH, so there is less incentive for a singlesig user to switch over to Taproot. And we already know that some entities will not immediately switch to P2WPKH or even P2SH-P2WPKH, which give fee discounts, so it will take even longer for a significant number of Taproot addresses to arise.

1

neonzzzzz Yesterday

Yes, it will take time.

1

bitusher Yesterday

> There have been reports of exchanges locking accounts or not accepting incoming funds if they detect it as coming from an equal-valued CoinJoin, because equal-valued CoinJoins are low-hanging fruit and are easily detectable as such onchain. CoinSwap and PayJoin are much harder to filter. its fair that we mention the risks of coinjoin. We should explain these risks. IMHO getting blocked by an exchange that doesn't respect privacy is a benefit and we should all walk away from these companies and they should lose our business. Also there is a distinction between the wholesale blocking of certain types of transactions and identifying the users of the UTXOs.

2

bitusher Yesterday

>This is a common but untrue claim. What makes CoinJoin cheaper will be cross-input signature aggregation. Yes, I am aware of this but sloppily left it out. Thank you for clarifying it so I can edit my post. Cheers. !lntip 5000 I was completely unaware that regular txs would still be than coinjoined with sigaggregation so was completely wrong and I'll fix that

2

almkglor Yesterday

> I was completely unaware that regular txs would still be than coinjoined with sigaggregation so was completely wrong and I'll fix that Equal-valued CoinJoins will indeed be ultimately larger than regular txes that don't care about privacy. However, non-equal-valued CoinJoins of multiple regular txes will indeed end up being smaller, in aggregate. But note that due to the non-equal-valued nature, it is much easier to re-link outputs to inputs compared to equal-valued CoinJoins. So you *could* make CoinJoins cooperatively with some parties to reduce the overall transaction size, but it would not improve privacy very much. And usually equal-valued CoinJoins are "extra" transactions you make to gain privacy, not something you would naturally do when transacting.

1

bitusher Yesterday

Yes, thus the most we can suggest in a practical sense is that after sig aggregation coinjoined transactions can almost be as small at regular transactions incentivizing privacy more ?

1

almkglor Yesterday

Not *quite* as small. Signatures are fairly big but not *that* big. Signatures are 64 bytes in Taproot, but are weighted as 16 vbytes due to witness discount, while actual inputs are 32bytes txid + 4bytes vout, and are not witness discountable. A CoinJoin will have at least as many inputs as there are participants, whereas a regular transaction will have 1 input, sometimes 2, and more rarely more than 2. Sigagg does give some size benefits, but not enough to say that it makes CoinJoin get anywhere *near* regular transactions. It does make CoinJoins cheaper, and if a mechanism for it exists, if you could arrange to have your equal-valued outputs be cut-through with a transaction that spends out to your payee plus a change from the equal-valued output (in addition to the change at the CoinJoin, which is toxic), then you can amortize the costs of the CoinJoin (at the risk that a participant disrupts the CoinJoin and prevents you from being able to pay via a CoinJoin in a timely fashion).

1

lntipbot Yesterday

Hi u/bitusher, thanks for tipping u/almkglor **5000** satoshis! *** *[^(More info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/lntipbot/wiki/index) ^| [^(Balance)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=lntipbot&subject=balance&message=!balance) ^| [^(Deposit)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=lntipbot&subject=deposit&message=!deposit 10000) ^| [^(Withdraw)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=lntipbot&subject=withdraw&message=!withdraw put_invoice_here) ^| ^(Something wrong? Have a question?) [^(Send me a message)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=drmoore718)*

1

Hyetigran 2 days ago

Thanks for the in depth breakdown. I didn't know there was that much going on. I guess it makes sense that privacy onchain isn't without its tradeoffs.

1

bitusher 2 days ago

Everything we do has tradeoffs, some more than others. Other privacy improvements being developed are Dandelion https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0156.mediawiki but that was rejected and I still need to research why

2

belcher_ Yesterday

> I still need to research why sdaftuar wrote a nice post on stackexchange about it here: https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/81503/what-is-the-tradeoff-between-privacy-and-implementation-complexity-of-dandelion

1

bitusher Yesterday

!lntip 5000 Thank you.

1

lntipbot Yesterday

Hi u/bitusher, thanks for tipping u/belcher_ **5000** satoshis! *** *[^(More info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/lntipbot/wiki/index) ^| [^(Balance)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=lntipbot&subject=balance&message=!balance) ^| [^(Deposit)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=lntipbot&subject=deposit&message=!deposit 10000) ^| [^(Withdraw)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=lntipbot&subject=withdraw&message=!withdraw put_invoice_here) ^| ^(Something wrong? Have a question?) [^(Send me a message)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=drmoore718)*

1

notimeformorons redditor for 2 months 2 days ago

I totally agree.

4

7 5

Winding-Dirt-Travels Yesterday

I'm can't wait to see how the market dynamics work out for main net staking

Ballpark looks to be a about 150 usd a month to run the test net in aws

2

Helix1123 2 days ago

Is there some instructions lying around for how to set up my own client? I have minimal programming skills but want to support Eth.

4

Builder_Bob23 Yesterday

Just FYI, the guides are good but there is a high likelihood that you will still get stuck at some point. I HIGHLY recommend that you leverage the Prysmatic Labs, Lighthouse, and EthStaker discords (or whatever other client you decide to go with, though from what I understand those are the 2 most user friendly to set up). Good luck!

2

Helix1123 Yesterday

Thanks for the advice. I get the impression it will get ugly at some points but I'll grind through it..hopefully

1

LavoP 1 day ago

/r/ethstaker

2

maninthecryptosuit Yesterday

https://www.reddit.com/r/ethstaker/comments/i183gx/how_to_stake_on_the_eth2_medalla_testnet_a/

2

sneakpeekbot 1 day ago

Here's a sneak peek of /r/ethstaker using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/ethstaker/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year! \#1: [A comprehensive look at hardware for staking.](https://np.reddit.com/r/ethstaker/comments/ggmbvd/a_comprehensive_look_at_hardware_for_staking/) \#2: [8 Things Every Eth2 Validator Should Know Before Staking](https://medium.com/chainsafe-systems/8-things-every-eth2-validator-should-know-before-staking-94df41701487) | [56 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/ethstaker/comments/gqy2uj/8_things_every_eth2_validator_should_know_before/) \#3: [Announcing the Ethereum 2 Phase 0 Multiclient Testnet (Medalla) Launch Viewing](https://np.reddit.com/r/ethstaker/comments/i18ju5/announcing_the_ethereum_2_phase_0_multiclient/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| [^^Contact ^^me](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| [^^Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| [^^Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/fpi5i6/blacklist_vii/)

2

Helix1123 1 day ago

You are a champion. Will read through these post. Thanks again

1

STILL_DETOX 2 days ago

how much do we need for main net?

2

iPeculiarly 7 hs ago

32 ether

1

STILL_DETOX 7 hs ago

no, how many minimum validators for phase 0 to work?

2

iPeculiarly 5 hs ago

Oh, it's ~0.5% of the supply So roughly 16000 validators

1

mrabino1 1 day ago

same launch requirements as this testnet.

2

STILL_DETOX Yesterday

how much ETH ?

2

L0rdBusiness Stay HOLD'n Yesterday

32.

2

STILL_DETOX 7 hs ago

no, how many minimum validators for phase 0 to work?

1

inomshokumotsu 2 days ago

As someone who is testing staking, this was a REALLY rough launch. Most of the clients weren't ready until hours before launch (and most of them are still not fully functional) and because of that only 55-60% of validators are actually running. It's good that it didn't fail, but it was very rocky.

48

Phonethic 2 days ago

Luckily the protocol has resilience build in against this scenario. Unluckily, it might take 2 to 3 weeks before offline validators get kicked out. I suppose when real money ^^^^eth is at stake, we will have a higher participation rate.

21

teabagsOnFire 1 day ago

I'm one of the many that setup late and would act different with real money to gain/lose.

2

NoltyFR 2 days ago

it was more than 66% for the chain to work.

5

inomshokumotsu 2 days ago

It was below that for the first hour and it looks like it is about to drop back below that Edit: why the downvotes? There's a chart linked below that backs up what I said.

7

Helloooboyyyyy 2 days ago

Bagholders want to avoid reality and live in lala land

0

Davlucmac 2 days ago

Where can one see a live count on validators?

4

jsmoke00 2 days ago

beaconcha.in

3

shiba_son_of_doge 2 days ago

https://beaconcha.in/epochs Last epochs show roughly 80% of validators are active.

8

coolfarmer 2 days ago

I find this really nice, as a programmer I love when things work not like I tought. This is how a software can get better. 0 bug for a thing like ETH2 could be very scary.

24

Kike328 2 days ago

One thing is to fix bugs which appears on the testnet and other different thing is to have the clients not prepared and do everything in a rush

6

torfbolt 1 day ago

The p2p networking between clients started only 48h before genesis, at which point some bugs became apparent that had to be fixed.

5

ascendantlogic 2 days ago

Yep, this is exactly why they run extended testnets

32

SuddenMind 2 days ago

Seemed to me like all the client teams tried to squeeze a bunch of client updates right before Medalla genesis. Does anyone have a good reason for why this would be done?

8

Stobie Yesterday

Because it could be the last chance to test any changes you make in a real massive genesis. Assuming this is the last testnet there's no more chances to test other than simulating something similar which will never be the same as real conditions with thousands of nodes spaced all over the world and random latency, user error etc.

6

SuddenMind Yesterday

Were they really making genesis changes though? I also think you can do your own testnet if you need to fix bugs around genesis (Prysm has done a bunch, Onyx, Sapphire, Topaz, etc.).

1

torfbolt 1 day ago

Because there were bugs that had to be fixed

13

SuddenMind Yesterday

Thanks for your response. It seemed like everything was running fine during Onyx, Schlesi, Witti and Altona.. I'm not sure why they had to do it right before Medalla. Did the spec change?

1

torfbolt Yesterday

There were lots of bug fixes throughout all of those testnets. As I wrote below, some issues only became apparent once all of the 5 participating clients started p2p networking with each other 48h before genesis. Those 48h are a design constant of the network spec, and I expect this will be made longer for mainnet genesis.

1

coolfarmer 2 days ago

Extended testnet? Medalla is the first multi-clients testnet for the beaconchain, no?

1

Kike328 2 days ago

No, Altona was also muticlient

11

ascendantlogic 2 days ago

Yes and it’ll run for a few months.

4

ofkarma 2 days ago

If ya ain’t first ur last