This conversation demonstrates to me a divide in Bitcoin participants that wasn't clear before. For devs like niftynei, the true "users" in the system are node operators and miners. All the efforts devs put in to maintaining and enhancing the code have those participants top of mind first, which is why niftynei can be so dismissive of Saylor's ossification arguments. She couldn't care less about what Saylor believes 🤣 I suppose in the earliest days of Bitcoin every participant was a node operator or miner, but today most hodlers have their Bitcoin at a custodian and with the ETFs that number of non self-sovereign hodlers will far outpace those with private keys, and much further outpace node operators. I hope Peter can do more episodes directly addressing dev culture vs. non-sovereign hodler culture.
Makes me realise how important the work "The Bitcoin Way " do is . I've been encouraging Pete to get them on the show , meanwhile just book a free welcome call ! Proper self custody and running a node is essential if you're a real bitcoiner. Mention John when you book your call . Cheers ;)
Speaking of block stream and Adam it’s time for an interview with him so we can hear his thoughts on bitcoin at the moment and what he’s expecting and excited about
I'm deep into Bitcoin and i still don't fully understand the Lighting Network. Where can i buy Bitcoin on the lighting network in exchange for stable coins so i don't have to use KYC?
You talk about test pinging a transaction. Would it not be possible to do a 1 sat tx with a 0 sat fee. The transaction would never be mined, but it would enter 'mempools', right ? If it's in the mempool, the receiving wallet can se it, and show it was sent to the correct address. If it doesn't enter the default mempool, because the fee is too low, surly this could be changed. This would probably not help if your being actively attacked, because the attacker could make a similar transaction to the wallet the user expect to see the ping, but if you just wanna make sure you are sending to the right address, this could still work, no ?
I've been an Mechanical engineer for around 15 years now. Over that time, I've developed an instinctive defensive response to phrases like "wouldn't be great if ...". I do think all options implemented via soft-fork will be explored eventually. It's inevitable.
Ecash doesn't use neither a database (blockchain or any other type) nor a consensus mechanism. In ecash, tokens are minted by the mint and in the case of Fedi, Cashu, or any other mints backed by Bitcoin (Ecash has nothing to do with it, actually), it gives you ecash tokens in exchange for sats (either on chain or through LN, or by any other mean that will be available in the future). Distributing your funds to different mints make sense to keep different amounts on different mints with different purposes. You could keep a larger amount of money on a family mint, with money shared with members of your family and maybe friends. In a local (a village or company or University mint, etc.) mint you could keep a smaller amount for daily expenses, etc.
Peter seems to have got Nifty thinking about things she hasn’t thought about before… like when she said “as long as you can pick an address for bitcoin to send to, you’re good ie don’t have to worry about covenants” my immediate thoughts was similar to Peter’s “what about time-locked bitcoin”, and she’s like “oh yeah! That could happen” 🤣
I was shocked that she didn't know exactly how fees are determined on the main chain. Someone pushing Lightning should automatically know that and be able to concisely explain it. Simply put, you are not charged by the amount of Bitcoin you send, but the amount of data you take up in the block. It is broken down into sats per v-byte. This is why it is important to consolidate your UTXOs(which they are just an unspent balance sitting in a wallet, thats it) and don't DCA less than .01 into cold storage at one time. When consolidating, wait until fees are lower(middle of the night), generate a new address, and send your whole balance to that new address. For example, every ten .01 you save across different addresses, consolidate into .1. This will cut your transaction costs down considerably when making a big move with your stack.
Watching further into the show..This is really bad. I can tell Peter is disappointed for sure. He knows more about this than she does. Someone watching this for the first time is going to walk away NOT wanting to use Lightning. This lady is clueless and even admits it. She seems more like a secretary in an office that uses Lightning rather than an expert..You can't act like an expert who is pushing Bitcoin adoption and then openly confess that you don't even care about problems that don't apply to you...Unbelievable..Imagine if this was a man saying all of this, we would be wondering why he's on the podcast I really like the show, but this episode isn't going to convince anyone to adopt Bitcoin. Samson Mow can break this scaling topic down wayyyy better.
@@THOMPSON8787 I think the issue in this convo is that Peter and niftynei don't actually agree on what "Bitcoin adoption" means. For devs like niftynei, Bitcoin adoption means running your own core node and lightning node. For Peter, adoption means custodial ownership via non-tradfi means such as Liquid. I hope Peter does an entire episode on "adoption" because I strongly suspect we all don't mean the same thing by the phrase.
Zero Knowledge Proofs are going to on the tip of everyone's tongue over the next couple of years. Interviews with Silvio Micali/Shafi Goldwasser (inventors of ZKP) or Eli Ben-Sasson/Alessandro Chiesa (ZK-Starks) could be helpful for everyone. Thanks for the content!
Yeah, I'd delete this episode if I was Peter. I watched the whole thing. He obviously thought she was someone who was way more knowledgeable and inciteful, far from an expert. She's more like a Bitcoin fan who happens to run a Lightning node and help gather the community. She openly admitted she doesn't know much about scaling. And that she doesn't care if it doesn't apply to her.....wow
BTC maxis are so narrow minded. No regular human being has the time to open a lightning channel, and if you are going to use lightning custodially, you might as well use a sufficiently decentralised altcoin. The security guarantees might be lower than on chain Bitcoin transactions, but it's better than trusting a custodian.
The only way to be absolutely (100%) sure that you have control over an amount of BTC is by running you own Bitcoin node and verifying the transaction on it. If you don't, you are trusting someone else (the node your wallet is using) to be telling you the truth.
I have heard after pasting you want to double check the front and back characters (say 4-5 characters of the address) to be sure the paste was correct. And even then there have been some scams where they have put similar addresses so a quick check of front and back characters may not be enough. Then if you are sending a largish amount always do a test send.!!! That is the way to be sure. 👍
I had to stop listening, because... like... it's like... usually... if that makes sense... I feel like... yeah.... because... uhm... like... whatever...
Yeah, this 'uptalk' that many young women do is really annoying. It totally makes you sound dumb (uptalk is a speech pattern where declarative sentences end with a rising intonation, similar to how questions are typically spoken).
Nice call whoever decided to add date / block height / and price in the bottom corner. Down the road that'll be good context for future viewers.
Agreed
100%
Bottom right corner of what?
@@foxateyour mum
This conversation demonstrates to me a divide in Bitcoin participants that wasn't clear before. For devs like niftynei, the true "users" in the system are node operators and miners. All the efforts devs put in to maintaining and enhancing the code have those participants top of mind first, which is why niftynei can be so dismissive of Saylor's ossification arguments. She couldn't care less about what Saylor believes 🤣 I suppose in the earliest days of Bitcoin every participant was a node operator or miner, but today most hodlers have their Bitcoin at a custodian and with the ETFs that number of non self-sovereign hodlers will far outpace those with private keys, and much further outpace node operators. I hope Peter can do more episodes directly addressing dev culture vs. non-sovereign hodler culture.
This is a great show, if that makes sense
😂
🤣🤣🤣
Makes me realise how important the work "The Bitcoin Way " do is . I've been encouraging Pete to get them on the show , meanwhile just book a free welcome call ! Proper self custody and running a node is essential if you're a real bitcoiner. Mention John when you book your call . Cheers ;)
Speaking of block stream and Adam it’s time for an interview with him so we can hear his thoughts on bitcoin at the moment and what he’s expecting and excited about
Wife is fully supportive of my Bedford habits. Hopefully the fam will join next year!
Nifty is an absolute beast. What a beautiful mind! I learned a lot
I'm deep into Bitcoin and i still don't fully understand the Lighting Network. Where can i buy Bitcoin on the lighting network in exchange for stable coins so i don't have to use KYC?
great episode. love nifty shes the best
Lightning is only 6 years old, a lot of people forget this, a lot of innovation can still happen
Good point. Someone might think about VoIP in the year 2000⚡️
You talk about test pinging a transaction. Would it not be possible to do a 1 sat tx with a 0 sat fee. The transaction would never be mined, but it would enter 'mempools', right ? If it's in the mempool, the receiving wallet can se it, and show it was sent to the correct address. If it doesn't enter the default mempool, because the fee is too low, surly this could be changed. This would probably not help if your being actively attacked, because the attacker could make a similar transaction to the wallet the user expect to see the ping, but if you just wanna make sure you are sending to the right address, this could still work, no ?
Lisa is great for Bitcoin!
What are they on about? What's a UTXO? ;-)
I've been an Mechanical engineer for around 15 years now. Over that time, I've developed an instinctive defensive response to phrases like "wouldn't be great if ...".
I do think all options implemented via soft-fork will be explored eventually. It's inevitable.
Ecash doesn't use neither a database (blockchain or any other type) nor a consensus mechanism. In ecash, tokens are minted by the mint and in the case of Fedi, Cashu, or any other mints backed by Bitcoin (Ecash has nothing to do with it, actually), it gives you ecash tokens in exchange for sats (either on chain or through LN, or by any other mean that will be available in the future).
Distributing your funds to different mints make sense to keep different amounts on different mints with different purposes. You could keep a larger amount of money on a family mint, with money shared with members of your family and maybe friends. In a local (a village or company or University mint, etc.) mint you could keep a smaller amount for daily expenses, etc.
Nifty is awesome!
The answer to Peter's question about how a custodial lightning user can become self sovereign is to use a swap provider like boltz
Great interview!
Peter seems to have got Nifty thinking about things she hasn’t thought about before… like when she said “as long as you can pick an address for bitcoin to send to, you’re good ie don’t have to worry about covenants” my immediate thoughts was similar to Peter’s “what about time-locked bitcoin”, and she’s like “oh yeah! That could happen” 🤣
Great episode
We need an episode with Adam Back ASAP
I was shocked that she didn't know exactly how fees are determined on the main chain. Someone pushing Lightning should automatically know that and be able to concisely explain it.
Simply put, you are not charged by the amount of Bitcoin you send, but the amount of data you take up in the block. It is broken down into sats per v-byte.
This is why it is important to consolidate your UTXOs(which they are just an unspent balance sitting in a wallet, thats it) and don't DCA less than .01 into cold storage at one time. When consolidating, wait until fees are lower(middle of the night), generate a new address, and send your whole balance to that new address. For example, every ten .01 you save across different addresses, consolidate into .1. This will cut your transaction costs down considerably when making a big move with your stack.
Watching further into the show..This is really bad. I can tell Peter is disappointed for sure. He knows more about this than she does. Someone watching this for the first time is going to walk away NOT wanting to use Lightning.
This lady is clueless and even admits it. She seems more like a secretary in an office that uses Lightning rather than an expert..You can't act like an expert who is pushing Bitcoin adoption and then openly confess that you don't even care about problems that don't apply to you...Unbelievable..Imagine if this was a man saying all of this, we would be wondering why he's on the podcast
I really like the show, but this episode isn't going to convince anyone to adopt Bitcoin. Samson Mow can break this scaling topic down wayyyy better.
@@THOMPSON8787 I think the issue in this convo is that Peter and niftynei don't actually agree on what "Bitcoin adoption" means. For devs like niftynei, Bitcoin adoption means running your own core node and lightning node. For Peter, adoption means custodial ownership via non-tradfi means such as Liquid. I hope Peter does an entire episode on "adoption" because I strongly suspect we all don't mean the same thing by the phrase.
Zero Knowledge Proofs are going to on the tip of everyone's tongue over the next couple of years. Interviews with Silvio Micali/Shafi Goldwasser (inventors of ZKP) or Eli Ben-Sasson/Alessandro Chiesa (ZK-Starks) could be helpful for everyone. Thanks for the content!
Interviews that Peter has done or somewhere else?
I would say Satoshi is wiser than Rusty 🤨
As a viewer, it's like..... when is this start being for me?
5 mins of thinking that leads to SKIP
Bye
Yeah, I'd delete this episode if I was Peter. I watched the whole thing. He obviously thought she was someone who was way more knowledgeable and inciteful, far from an expert. She's more like a Bitcoin fan who happens to run a Lightning node and help gather the community.
She openly admitted she doesn't know much about scaling. And that she doesn't care if it doesn't apply to her.....wow
me too
@@THOMPSON8787 doing the lord's work. Thanks for saving me an hour of my life brother
I love her laugh.
what about her brain? or legs 🤔
can someone think this thing thru already, jfc...
BTC maxis are so narrow minded. No regular human being has the time to open a lightning channel, and if you are going to use lightning custodially, you might as well use a sufficiently decentralised altcoin. The security guarantees might be lower than on chain Bitcoin transactions, but it's better than trusting a custodian.
The only way to be absolutely (100%) sure that you have control over an amount of BTC is by running you own Bitcoin node and verifying the transaction on it. If you don't, you are trusting someone else (the node your wallet is using) to be telling you the truth.
Copy and pasting the address works everytime so you don't have to worry if you put the correct address in or not.
There's security flaws with this
I have heard after pasting you want to double check the front and back characters (say 4-5 characters of the address) to be sure the paste was correct. And even then there have been some scams where they have put similar addresses so a quick check of front and back characters may not be enough. Then if you are sending a largish amount always do a test send.!!! That is the way to be sure. 👍
omg, hope you sleepwalkers learned something today.
Damm brilliant woman
I had to stop listening, because... like... it's like... usually... if that makes sense... I feel like... yeah.... because... uhm... like... whatever...
She probably from Cali
I couldn't even make it 5 mins in. That was annoying af.
Loved it! A really smart conversation! Thanks, appreciate
Yeah, this 'uptalk' that many young women do is really annoying. It totally makes you sound dumb (uptalk is a speech pattern where declarative sentences end with a rising intonation, similar to how questions are typically spoken).
low interest, no info on current high TVL bitcoin L2 Merlin, Core, BEVM .....
Damm a month old?