I've been cooking a lot more recently and it's one of the most enjoyable parts of my day. There's nothing more satisfying than grilling a steak to the perfect amount of doneness, or tossing a bunch of aromatic spices into a pasta sauce whose scent fills the room. At the end of it I feel like I accomplished something productive and I get to eat something delicious that I crafted to my own taste. I've also had way more energy since I've stopped eating processed junk and take-out food.
Wait, is it 10 other commits, or 10 other pull requests? For medium-sized projects (5-10 devs) it's generally good practice for devs to make a separate branch per feature, make lots of commits on the side branch, then merge the side branch into master in a single PR once the feature is ready.
One thing I would point out is that when calculating r, the equation r=k*G mod N is somewhat misleading. G is not a number, but rather an (X,Y) point on an elliptic curve. There is a way to "add" two points on an elliptic curve but it is a group operation which is very unlike normal addition. "Multiplication" still exists between a scalar and a point but refers to a number of point self-additions.
So really R=k*G generates a new point R, where k is the nonce and G is a point that is part of the ECDSA standard. Then r is taken as the x-coordinate of R.
It is easy to derive k in b=k*a mod N if you know a and b, but nearly impossible to derive k in B=k*A if B is k self additions of A on an elliptic curve.
Making money is a good thing. Money can give you freedom and let you live the life you want to live. But to make the most money, you should focus not on the money itself, but rather on providing value. I highly recommend MJ DeMarco's book The Millionaire Fastlane for some insights on this.
I personally only own bitcoin, but obviously there's other opinions out there. The way I see it, the goal of bitcoin is to store value, whereas the goal of other projects is to achieve some non-SoV utility (payments, smart contracts, etc). First, solving the money problem is a much bigger deal than solving utility problems. Second, as the bitcoin ecosystem evolves, I believe technological solutions will be developed on top of bitcoin for those utilities, negating the need for separate tokens.
This is great news. As a major bitcoin holder, I still have to keep some cash in a traditional bank to write checks, receive payroll, and use a debit card. A bitcoin bank would allow me to store that last remaining % in BTC.
On HN if you try to post anything even remotely positive about bitcoin you get downvoted to oblivion, so it usually doesn't feel worth posting. For an introduction about El Salvador I highly recommend Jack Maller's talk where he made the announcement.
Haha as someone who listened to the entire Twitter spaces chat last night, it's amazing how ignorant HN is about what's actually happening on the ground in El Salvador.
This is interesting, I would have expected a loss. I recall MSTR had to report a loss in 2020 even though it went up a lot, due to how GAAP works with bitcoin. Basically if you buy bitcoin (or any property) at $X, then it dips to $Y, then goes back up to $Z, you have to report the difference between X and Y (purchase price - lowest point) as a GAAP loss.
Overcollaterization and multi-sig. For example on HodlHodl you can lend USDC where the borrow posts more collateral than the loan. The lender, borrower, and HodlHodl each own one key in a 2-of-3 multi-sig. If there's a dispute then HodlHodl will resolve it.
The way I see it, dollars and bitcoin are two competing forms of money. To calculate the equilibrium market cap of bitcoin, multiply each person's net worth by the fraction they wish to allocate to bitcoin and sum over the population. For example if the total value of all goods is 200T and the net-worth weighted allocation fraction is 1%, then the equilibrium market cap would be 2T. You don't need "greater fools" because people are constantly buying and selling in equilibrium, not just selling, similar to how gold maintains a pretty steady 10T market cap.
However bitcoin has superior intrinsic monetary properties to all other stores of value, including gold, so the equilibrium market cap might be extremely high.
Michael Saylor pulled the same move six months ago and explains it really well. Highly recommend watching any of his interviews. The one with Preston Pysh is particularly enlightening.
Essentially bitcoin is a really good store of value with superior monetary properties to all other assets. If you want to store wealth for a hundred years there's nothing better. Even gold has 2% devaluation per year and has custodial risk, whereas bitcoin has no devaluation (21M supply cap), is easy to self-custody, and is very secure (high energy use/decentralized).
As a bitcoiner myself, I like to think of dollars and BTC as just two currencies. Buying BTC is equivalent to selling dollars. If you think that BTC is the better money, it makes sense to move into it and stay there perpetually.
Will Kraken provide bitcoin savings accounts? I'm thinking something where you deposit some BTC, it gets loaned out for several months to a year (and you're not allowed to withdraw during that time), and you get paid an interest rate denominated in BTC. Would be nice to get a positive real rate given the 21M supply cap.
I disagree. Renaming "pull requests" to "merge requests" isn't politically motivated, whereas this is a top-down change from political activists. I'm worried that society might go down a path where people can't push back out of fear of one's career or safety.
This article misrepresents just how much of the economy it's made up of these IOUs. If you deposit $100 and there's a 10% reserve requirement, that doesn't mean the bank can loan out $90. Rather, they can loan out $1000 since the $100 is 10% of that.
I agree, and I've put quite a lot into bitcoin recently due to the halving. But that was only after reading and understanding everything I could about the bitcoin markets. From the outside it definitely seems like a crazy speculation.
I would never recommend someone invest in bitcoin unless they've done a lot of research, are ready to hold through drops of 50% or more, and are prepared to hold for many years. Investors who haven't done the due diligence could be tempted to sell after a huge drop, and it's probably not for most people.
That being said, to outsiders it could be argued that bitcoin is at least a decent asymmetrical bet, and worth throwing a couple percent at. But only as much as someone is willing to lose.
The technology should exist by now for a decentralized twitter right? Resorting to email newsletters seems very clunky. Couldn't there be something that uses a bittorrent-like protocol, where the followers support the network for whomever they're following?
We don't need the entire system to collapse for bitcoin to become mainstream. This can occur with slow integration. It's probably a good thing the halvings occur every 4 years since these tend to drive bull cycles, and are spaced out enough to give time for the technology to catch up with the market cap.
A cardiotoxicity paper from the WHO in 2017 said the following:
"Despite hundreds of millions of doses administered in the treatment of malaria, there have been no reports of sudden unexplained death associated with quinine, chloroquine or amodiaquine, although each drug causes QT/QTcinterval prolongation. Unfortunately, there are relatively few prospective studies of the electrocardiographic effects of these drugs."
I think the stock to flow model is a little silly. S2F and price are both coincidentally exponential, it's like the old pirates vs global warming joke. That being said I do believe there's a chance the halvening isn't fully priced in since this will fundamentally disrupt the amount of sell volume.