I hope more people doing honest work in Bitcoin and other blockchains boycott @Cointelegraph
This is not the first time they have published irresponsible clickbait that is poorly sourced and contains misinformation. They do a disservice to the entire industry.
@Cointelegraph I don't want to link to the article, because that would only drive more attention to that garbage.
It takes 10x the effort to debunk garbage that it does to write it.
@Cointelegraph If you are writing about a controversial topic, you don't quote 2 people from the competing systems (BSV, BCH) without any counterpoint or clarification from an actual Bitcoin developer or expert.
Probably can't find a serious person to talk to them because of their history
@Cointelegraph It is thoroughly irresponsible to carry water for competitors by spreading misinformation unopposed or unquestioned.
This exact re-organization with a transaction getting replaced can occur in exactly the same way in BCH and BSV. It has nothing to do with RBF or Segwit, nor do those technologies change how PoW works. See page 8 of the Satoshi whitepaper.
@Cointelegraph This is Bitcoin working exactly as specified 12 years ago, exactly as Satoshi outlines on page 8 of the paper, where they calculate the probability of a re-org after 1 block, 2 blocks... etc.
It's almost as if this was part of Satoshi's "vision"
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
"A double-spend broke Bitcoin" FUD that was circulated by an irresponsible publication.
1/
There was a chain re-organization in the Bitcoin blockchain. This is a common occurrence that is part of Bitcoin's normal operation. It is a result of decentralized consensus under Proof-of-Work. All PoW chains do this.
2/
Two blocks were mined almost simultaneously, competing for the same height, meaning that they had the same parent block and were trying to extend the chain of the same block
3/
Many if not most Americans were against #MLK and the Civil Rights movement at the time. They justified the police brutality against peaceful protesters and assigned isolated violence to the entire movement. Exactly the way #BLM has been treated since Ferguson.
#MLK was accused of being a maxist, a terrorist, an enemy agent and a traitor. He and his family were targeted, surveilled, maligned, and terrorized by the FBI and law enforcement. Exactly the same as is being done to civil rights and #BLM movements today.
I need a data-minimization plugin that will wipe/clear specific fields from a Wordpress/Woocommerce customer database at regular intervals. We've been doing that manually but it doesn't scale.
I'm guessing I'm not the only one.
1/
The general idea is to remove information that we *need* to collect (e.g. shipping address) once we don't need it anymore. Woocommerce has some basic functions around data removal, but they're insufficient for the task.
2/
But first: Do you know of any such tool/plugin that can be configured to "Remove the address, zip, town fields from customer and user databases once the order status is complete or after N days/weeks/months"
3/
Yesterday, while everyone was helpfully explaining to me why Bitcoin is broken, obsolete and failing to fulfill it's mission, I ran my monthly payroll.
1/
I have a dozen people on my team, scattered across six countries and four continents. A multinational small business. Many get paid in Bitcoin or Ether.
/2
BTC payroll is batched in a single RBF transaction, sent from Segwit native addresses. I low-ball the fee by 50% usually and wait 30 minutes, then bump it if I need to. Mostly I don't need to.
3/
During times of extreme market excitement, the capacity of Bitcoin gets strained. That means that Bitcoin transactions become expensive and slow. Some may even become "stuck". Here's what to do...
1/
First, check and see how congested things are. A great site for this is Johoe's Bitcoin Mempool statistics:
That rising mountain is 6hrs of activity. There are already 30,000 transactions willing to pay more than 50 satoshis per byte
2/
Transaction fees are measured in satoshis per virtual byte (vbyte). Different transaction types have different sizes, depending on the complexity, number of inputs/outputs and address type being spent.
A typical size (one input, two outputs) is about 144 vB.
/3