Leon, the fact checker

@factcheckmypost

I work in tech. The retweets and posts do not represent the views of myself or my company.

Vrijeme pridruživanja: siječanj 2019.

Tweetovi

Blokirali ste korisnika/cu @factcheckmypost

Jeste li sigurni da želite vidjeti te tweetove? Time nećete deblokirati korisnika/cu @factcheckmypost

  1. Prikvačeni tweet

    Trust minimization security is not optional - it's the minimum requirement to be relevant to decentralized tech field. Security is a weakest link problem - any trust minimization failure renders all else irrelevant. stake/supply examples

    Poništi
  2. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    prije 10 sati

    ELI5 of 's first commercial product, Loop, by

    Poništi
  3. Issue is decentralization is an unknown after the project is launched. The only thing we do know for sure is its design at time of launch. The design at launch is the only only reliable metric to determine decentralization in 3 years & hence known at start.

    Poništi
  4. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    prije 5 sati

    The man who coined the term "bitcoin maximalism" is going around calling projects like Tron that forked Ethereum "scammy". ETH might be able to attract more elitist talent, but whatever they come up with, Tron can adopt in 1 day at a fraction of the cost.

    Poništi
  5. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    5. velj

    "crypto dollarization" only 2 results when you google it (From and interestingly) going to be a monster 2020 trend. will elaborate soon.

    Poništi
  6. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    5. velj

    We’re excited to announce the beta of Lightning Loop ()! Loop now batches all swaps to reduce on-chain footprint (passing some of the savings onto users), uses LSAT (HTTP-402 LN macaroon API tokens) for auth, and allows larger swaps:

    Poništi
  7. 5. velj

    a community built entirely around profitably failing at decentralization has frequently failed at decentralization. what a shocker.

    Poništi
  8. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    5. velj
    Odgovor korisnicima i sljedećem broju korisnika:
    Poništi
  9. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    5. velj
    Odgovor korisnicima i sljedećem broju korisnika:

    The rationale is that witness data can be discounted, because it has far lower long-term costs to the network (it does not enter the UTXO set, in particular). It's not arbitrarily charging luggage differently; it's charging differently for checked and carry-on luggage.

    Poništi
  10. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    5. velj
    Odgovor korisnicima

    Educated sounding nonsense sounds exactly like something that would cone out of Vitalik's mouth...

    Poništi
  11. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    4. velj

    There are two ways of approaching adding covenants to Bitcoin: recursive and hash chained. Recursive is what you expect with each coin explicitly constructing its children. Hash chained is where each coin refers to outputs by their secure hash.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  12. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    4. velj

    sometimes I despair

    Poništi
  13. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    3. velj

    the "problem" that utility tokens solve is the founders not being rich enough that's it. that's the tweet

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  14. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    Odgovor korisnicima i sljedećem broju korisnika:

    I’m a HUGE supporter of privacy work on Lightning (I even continue to fund some LN development) as well as what Samourai is doing. That said, researchers and Bitcoin core developers all agree that it’s FAR from sufficient right now. Don’t oversell it, it’s irresponsible!

    Poništi
  15. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    Odgovor korisnicima

    Segwit did have an upper bound on how much block space we could gain from it (as much as there is witness data). The discussion on the exact discount mostly centered around rectifying incentive issues that caused it to be cheaper to create new outputs than to consume old ones.

    Poništi
  16. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    30. sij

    This week's rip of RHR is live! & I discuss: - Coronavirus - Flagged CoinJoins - teases - Data breaches (smh ) - on private LN channels - - much more Peep. Share. Subscribe. Engage.

    Poništi
  17. proslijedio/la je Tweet

    0/6 just doubled down on his plans to run a BCH mining cartel. Here's a thread where we look at some of his claims: 1. No donation 'option' 2. Hashrate voting 3. Rights to the coinbase 4. Manipulating the vote 5. Hashpower threat 6. 'Accepting' a negative vote 👇

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  18. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    31. sij

    "Critical Flaw" Sheesh. Trezor shouldn't have jumped on the physically secure bandwagon. 95% of the security of a hardware wallet is against malware, not thieves breaking into your apartment, and by trying to address the latter you harm HW auditing.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  19. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    31. sij

    I find it hilarious how many anti-BTC people claim without any evidence that Lightning is a failure. Over the past year I've done hundreds of dollars of LN transactions, dozens of txs, with very few issues. Just the other day I paid a phone bill with It works.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  20. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    31. sij

    I really enjoyed doing this episode. Great opportunity to dive into the history of a dozen notable alts. Provocative title aside, I tried to be fair!

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  21. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    31. sij
    Poništi

Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.

Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.

    Možda bi vam se svidjelo i ovo:

    ·