Quote from: eXPHorizon on February 13, 2025, 07:24:53 PM

China officialy owns 0 BTC.

How would you know?

Quote from: cAPSLOCK on February 13, 2025, 08:09:02 PM

Quote from: JayJuanGee on February 13, 2025, 04:53:08 PM

It might not be a BIG deal, and sure my memory ~~might be~~ is likely flawed in a variety of ways to the extent that I might ready, willing and able to search through old posts discussing the parameters of various bitcoin-related battles (challenges) over past times.

If you are talking about issues of big blocks... I can guarantee you are thinking of someone else. UNLESS me merely saying that I am not against conservative blocksize increases to continue to buy us time to develop on L2 systems. But I also think this is not likely.

But ultimately I think "big blocks" are a very shortsighted goal as we would never be able to make the big enough for scaling purposes. It's just not realistic in the slightest. So that is not me.

I almost feel like going back just to parse your words and argue with you, but that would take work... so I reserve my right to raise the subject matter later, if needed... And, in another sense, it may well be water under the bridge and not mattering too much.

Quote from: cAPSLOCK on February 13, 2025, 08:09:02 PM

As to privacy... I DO think there could be some base layer changes to enable the enhancement of privacy on HIGHER LAYERS. We 100% absolutely CANNOT turn bitcoin into a privacy coin so to speak, on the base layer. Period.

There are still various tactics that can cause plausible deniability in regards to coins, and sure depending on who any of us might be wanting to be private from.... There is a lot of power to be able to directly transact with folks, and if we are drawing from wallets that might ONLY have as much as the transaction or maybe reasonable amounts higher than the transaction, then maybe no one would be able to figure out exactly how many hops back they might have to go to figure out if we might have larger stashes, and yeah we could end up making mistakes if someone is going back and looking at from where those coins had come. But yeah, if we get a lot more people transacting with bitcoin then that could also help to have the transactions to be more common... but we still might not want to spend from a 2 BTC wallet in order to buy $100 worth of something, but instead use our wallet that has 0.00634582 BTC.. and yeah maybe in some places we might want to use even a smaller wallet... but yeah, maybe $100 or less might be better done on lightning network to the extent anyone is set up with that ability..and practicing, too.

Quote from: cAPSLOCK on February 13, 2025, 08:09:02 PM

And I personally cannot stand the BCASHIAN arguments being made by the newer Monero proponents (as well as some of the old) with all their "read the whitepaper". "Bitcoin has failed p2p cash!" and "NGU" screeching.

I might not be completely clear about these lines of discussion...even though I am aware that a lot of bitcoin's value comes from our ability to transact peer to peer, even though we might not need to buy coffees with it...especially even buying a car through a private sale used to be something that we could historically do with cash... and some folks still do those kinds of cash to cash transactions and changes of title based on the representations... but it does not need to be a car, it could be a delivery of wood, concrete or tools and nails (or is it screws these days?) to a construction site.

Quote from: cAPSLOCK on February 13, 2025, 08:09:02 PM

Quote from: JayJuanGee on February 13, 2025, 04:53:08 PM

I probably don't even really disagree with you very much about privacy issues, including that there are needs to both be able to transact privately but also not having to fear various selective enforcement gotchas later down the road by entities wanting to track and control us..but also there are personal safety concerns with these kinds of matters too when we should be able to interact with each other directly and not worrying about how many hops back someone might see in terms of if they believe we are rich or not and if they tell their thug friend, who may well be acting on incomplete information, but still dangerous.. and maybe some additional rationale that if more folks are transacting with bitcoin, then no one can necessarily presume how many BTC that others might or might not have in various associated bitcoin addresses.

So... I really really want to see privacy for transactions above the base layer to continue to be developed.

So far there are a few viable projects in play:
Lightning
I WAS very optimistic, and still am, for lightning... but currently it has fallen WAY SHORT for the sake of privacy for two major reasons as well as some minor ones. I still run a node and JUST updated it's storage. I do not want to know how much I have spent doing this Wink

1. It is being used custodially 90%+ of the time. This 100% destroys the privacy. But this is what works for the common folk.
2. Because of the complexity Lightning use is currently optimized for big use by large LSPs It is VERY difficult to run a node well that works, and it can be quite costly to do so. So currently lightning is thriving for people who are using it for larger scale commercial uses (exchanges, large well managed routing nodes as well as access oriented LSPs etc.)

Also Lightning by nature only has Meh+ privacy even in the best circumstances. You really need to be using multiple hops and MPP for it to be reasonably private. But as a user you can make (bitcoin like) privacy booboos like sending to a channel partner (not private) routing through exactly one other node (not very private at all) etc.

Liquid
I have been saying for YEARS at this point that Liquid is a sleeper. I really think folks are not able to see why. The Fedarated model is wonderful, the base layer includes CT (ala Greg Maxwell with a hat tip to Monero). It can do pretty much anything ETH can do so we can veer off into stable coins (sigh) like it seems an absolute lock that we will. It trades SOME trust for a LOT of features. It is a very good compromise. But it is not battle tested AT ALL. Simply because no one uses it. One reason this is bad is it will reduce the anonymity that CT provides to the point it is useless... UNTIL there is significant traffic on that chain. And it is notable that Mopnero is STILL WAY MORE private due to it's multiple approaches to obfuscation. But if we could get traffic on Liquid we would see great privacy and

eCash
So there are two main Chaumian models in development currently. And Chaumian Cash is arguably PERFECT privacy. A bearer instrument with no means of knowing who has given it to whom.
But model #1 "Cashu" is 100% CUSTODIAL. Womp Womp. Welcome to getting rugged. Then again all the usual disclaimers apply. Only store so much in a Cashu wallet as you are willing to lose. Etc. It is a fantastic privacy model, but the custody issue makes it unattractive to those of us who want sovereignty.

Interestingly it DOES integrate with Lightning in cool ways which make it more flexible and increases on/offramp privacy.
Model #2 "Fedimint" might be a step closer to what we wand by distributing custody and risk... But it is behind #1 and liquid and lightning enough to continue to be irrelevant.

Monero
THIS is what any intelligent person SHOULD USE if they want to buy their pressed "benzos" (really Fent with food coloring) off the dark web. And yes... there is a bit of irony there. I am super sensitive to it since almost all the Bitcoin I hold was bitcoin I WON playing poker against many of the early devs and OGs (autistic fuckers who likely mostly beat me) and people buying and selling on Silk Road who had some extra coins to gamble online with (my "patrons").

It's privacy continues to be pretty much unrivaled, and its network effect is massive.
But it is also a L1 BLOCKCHAIN so if used seriously will ALWAYS be bloating to the point of centralization which comes with analysis risks.

AND you have a shared issue amongst all L2 solutions as well as shitcoins like Monero. On/Offramp exposure. "Ah.. Mr. cAPSLOCK... we see you bought some monero and then a few days later bought a bit less bitcoin back with Monero therefore we can conclude somewhat that you did something illegal in the meantime". Even though it was likely just to pay my Mullvad bill.
So... as usual it is tradeoffs all the way down.

I want to see L2 solutions for Bitcoin to rival Monero to the point you can kill yourself with various "research chemicals" as anonymously as you can with Monero.
Until that point? Monero is still winning.

So THAT is my position as of 2/25. Perhaps in five years when I am babbling about some new position I take you should have this post bookmarked to prove thjat I am changing my tune...
There ya go.
I stand ready for my batslap.

I am not deeply enough educated to challenge anything that you are saying... except to witness that you are saying that you love that other girl more than this girl. You did not tell me whether you listened to the Super Testnet interview that I had provided or to criticize any of his claims.

Quote from: cAPSLOCK on February 13, 2025, 08:09:02 PM

______________EDIT________________
Oh oh oh!
Aqua.

Why do I like it? Well it is a pile of tradeoffs. It is NOT a privacy panacea. But it DOES arguably grant a significant amount of privacy. It is NON CUSTODIAL. And although it does swaps via Sideswap it is as non custodial as possible and preserves privacy well in other areas... like Liquid storage, and Liquid based stables/assets etc. It is not perfect... but at this point fees are quite good, and features are even better. And since you are basically using a privacy enhanced LSP your lightning transactions are generally flawless. It is really really good software IMHO. I would still not TOUCH the darknet with this wallet though... and that is pretty much the acid test.

As to Cake? Ehh... I appriciate how hard they have tried... But they are a little too shitcoinery for my tastes. At the same times things like giftcrards bought with monero ARE cool.

There are a lot of cool things that happen in a lot of places, and I am not always clear about the trade offs, maybe we should be identifying and funding privacy oriented developers with any extra sats that we might happen to have? There are challenges for developers to both fund themselves (to be able to live) and also to develop to the extent that any of their projects or incentives to improve privacy are monetizable... including having attacks on privacy oriented developers and projects, whether referring to Samurai developers or Tornado cash and there have been others, including some wallets leaving the USA (phoenix, wallet of satoshi - though custodial -, exchanges closing in the USA because the USA government too much on the attack). A lot of my knowledge seems more superficial than yours....so it is good that you are sharing your experiences.... and your opinions, even if you seem to be liking that other girl better than this one.

Quote from: Ivystar5 on February 13, 2025, 09:40:33 PM

can't still believe I've been buying corns below six digits for more than two tweets now.

Probably a lucky Noob <<<<

It is what it is.

If you are able to keep buying for a whole cycle, then you should be getting somewhere. Also frontloading can be helpful, yet surely not everyone is able to front load their investment into bitcoin.

Are you still going to be hanging out in these here parts after a whole cycle (meaning 4 years)? or are you just trying to play this particular BTC price wave, and you will end up selling your whole 0.00132549 before it even doubles in value (price)?