jungly

https://blog.opdup.com

Rebooting P2Pool: https://github.com/pool2win/p2pool-v2

Public Key

npub1x0ywjcwk9zjffndn0wt485xx68h8vykdqg9yztya7lec5an0g4lqg09t7k

NIP-05 Address

Profile Code

nprofile1qqsr8j8fv8tz3fy5ekehh96n6rrdrmnkztxsyzjp9jwl0uu2weh52lspp4mhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mqpr4mhxue69uhkummnw3ez6ur4vgh8wetvd3hhyer9wghxuet5rn6r0a

Publishing to

nos.lol

nostr-pub.wellorder.net

Author Public Key

npub1x0ywjcwk9zjffndn0wt485xx68h8vykdqg9yztya7lec5an0g4lqg09t7k

Show more details

Last Notes

2026-05-02 15:57:52 CEST

Don't wait for someone else to run a pool. Run it yourself.
If you need to build your own templates and you can, and why wait for someone else to run the pool?
P2Poolv2, will let you run your pool while building your own templates.
https://github.com/p2poolv2/p2poolv2/

2026-04-12 15:04:21 CEST

- reply

Details on test setup, scripts to run the tests and verify the results
https://github.com/p2poolv2/p2poolv2/blob/main/load-tests/jmeter-testing/README.adoc

2026-03-18 06:28:58 CET

- reply

That was a good read. So many bad memories came running back 😀

2026-01-28 17:06:53 CET

- reply

Reading rocks!
Keep reading!

2026-01-26 09:14:53 CET

- reply

Sounds amazing, but three weeks away is not easy to do 😃

2026-01-26 09:14:17 CET

- reply

Yeah, following hashpool! Nice work.

2026-01-24 07:17:26 CET

Hydrapool had it's first outing over the last few days. Reaching 1.4EH/s and handling 1500 peak worker connections without breaking too much sweat.
- Built in rust, with excellent test coverage makes it easy to extend and maintain. Got an idea for a novel payout system, come give it a try on hydrapool
- Support for Solo and PPLNS accounting. Want to play with a novel accounting method. Come try it on hydrapool
- Exposes a web endpoint to fetch all user shares, so anyone can audit the pool
- Comes with a Grafana dash and Prometheus metrics so anyone can build a dashboard they like. D++ built one already https://dash.256f.org/
- Tight collaboration with P2Poolv2 libraries. So all this is only going to get tighter and more robust as we use it more and more.
https://github.com/256foundation/hydrapool
Shout out to @256foundation for supporting and more importantly for inspiring the work!
Dismantling the proprietary mining empire. ✊🏽

2026-01-01 23:07:28 CET

- reply

Well said. So many implications there, your title captures it though - separate the art from the artist. I'll try to remember that more. Heck. Might just stick a post it on the desk.

2025-10-24 14:13:23 CEST

- reply

Yes. Eric is looking for funding for contributors. He doesn't need the funding himself. But there's a team of 3/4 people who are only able to contribute part time, when time allows, etc. We need to get the funding to them.

2025-09-07 13:29:00 CEST

- reply

Bring*
My bad
😂

2025-09-07 09:09:35 CEST

- reply

Burying your own part of the key.
BYOPOK

2025-08-18 22:37:44 CEST

Some more testing of our stratum server today. Realised our starting difficulty was too low. Fixed that.
Thanks to the tester today who spent an hour on our matrix chat patiently waiting while the starting difficulty issue was discovered.
Our matrix room https://matrix.to/#/#p2poolv2:matrix.org
We are tying some loose ends on the difficulty adjustment algorithm. Aiming to sort this out over the next couple of days.
Then PPLNS!! #hydrapool #p2pool

2025-08-16 18:21:39 CEST

- reply

s/am/an :)

2025-08-16 13:40:20 CEST

Why #P2Pool? Am infographic by chatgpt
https://blossom.primal.net/9f45be593b571970be62b52dab64644478b557d523737ca815ae99e7161c89fb.png

2025-08-14 15:12:32 CEST

- reply

For the sake of precision - I guess revenue solves the problem.
However does that mean we are talking about running a non-profit to run a centralised mining pool? [sarcastic, rhetorical question] 🤯

2025-08-14 12:14:03 CEST

If you want to make profit, build a centralised service.
The corollary is the fun thing: If you are building a centralised service, you will need to make a profit.
The corollary is true because you need cap ex to maintain and secure a centralised service.
I am thinking of mining pools when I am thinking of such services.

2025-08-14 06:07:55 CEST

- reply

Got to try and improve things.
And yes, seeing monero's p2pool coming to life has been a big motivation to reboot p2pool for bitcoin.
There's still demand for alternatives to centralised pools fleecing small miners with up to 4% fees with FPPS.
If we don't try, we are giving up.

2025-08-12 23:00:48 CEST

- reply

Let's reboot p2pool, as the referred post talks about.
https://github.com/pool2win/p2pool-v2
Bitcoin has come a long way since 2017, bandwidths are much faster, we can totally reboot p2pool.
There's a whole lot of open issues and a GitHub project that puts them in order of priority.
We can do this. Ask not what bitcoin can do for you, etc.

2025-08-11 09:55:11 CEST

Every machine has had the same history – a long record of sleepless nights and of poverty, of disillusions and of joys, of partial improvements discovered by several generations of nameless workers, who have added to the original invention these little nothings, without which the most fertile idea would remain fruitless. More than that: every new invention is a synthesis, the resultant of innumerable inventions which have preceded it in the vast field of mechanics and industry.
The author might as well be talking about #FOSS. But I think he's talking about all machinery, all software!

2025-07-26 22:51:15 CEST

- reply

You could reverse the fee structure :)

2025-06-25 21:45:14 CEST

- reply

Coming soon. Wanted to get the word out that we have it fully working. On holidays for a couple of weeks. First item of action when back.

2025-06-25 07:23:28 CEST

We have a new stratum server implementation in Rust over at P2Poolv2. Here's why:
1. CKPool is great, but it's complicated and it's written in C.. It is very hard to extend or change. I tried as part of hydrapool effort for 256 Foundation telehash. We ran into issues at load with our changes. Enough to tell me, we need something easier to maintain and extend.
2. C doesn't make it easy to use async programming model where a core is freed while a thread waits for IO. You can do it, but the code gets complicated quick. We wanted to use modern tools like Rust's async/await so we can maintain and extend the server in future.
3. DATUM is again in C. On top of that it's tied to Ocean's model of block template protocols that we don't need in hydrapool or P2Poolv2. Messing with C or to forking the project wasn't a road we wanted to go down on.
4. SV2. This was the closest to our plans and we first tried to use the SV1 components for our user case. However, the code base was more complicated than we expected. There's good reasons for it, SV2 is opinionated to serve the SV2 model and it kind of created issues for us as we wanted to just use the SV1 parts of it. @nprofile…ct6w and @gitgabe helped a lot, but in the end I took the opportunity to just dive in and write our own.
## So where are we now?
We have the server working. It replicates the CKPool behaviour as closely as possible. We have tested with cpuminer and bitaxes.
## Next steps:
We are running some load tests to compare our implementation to CKPool. Results coming soon.
We need to test our implementation with variety of firmware.
## How can you help?
You can help us test by pointing a machine for 5 minutes. That's all we need. We'll log the interaction and if there's any failures we can fix it using the logs. We will set something up soon and invite testers.
BTW, initial load tests are showing we are competitive with CKPool. Rust can be fast! 🚀🚀
The repo is here: https://github.com/pool2win/p2pool-v2/
Stratum server is under the startum crate.
Just want to add that building stratum server has directly informed how we want to disseminate block templates and shares on P2Poolv2. That's another post though.

2025-05-21 07:35:54 CEST

- reply

Perpetually vibe code in the vortex of rust borrow checker and internal mutability!

2025-05-20 21:52:52 CEST

Rust makes it very easy to write code that will be very hard to understand by someone else, including your future self.
One responsibility we have as rust programmers is to write code that'll be easy to understand.
Think before you write the prompt! Think about what the AI gave you, then have a cup of tea and think some more.

2025-05-20 21:48:27 CEST

- reply

Why you not like many to many relationships?
UML even haz arrows fur it!

2025-05-08 14:27:03 CEST

CTV on its own is not the solution P2poolv2 is looking for. It doesn't help in reducing in chain foot print that much and requires miners to exchange extra on chain information.
1. We need log n outputs to create a ctv tree of outputs.
2. When a miner spends his output, it needs to have the rest of the outputs of its siblings as other unspent outputs. The siblings then need to watch the chain to see which utxo they can spend and each utxo spend uses more on chain space as ctv outputs for siblings to spend.
All the of the above is complex and still eats block chain space like a monster.
Meh. We need something better.
As an MVP, p2poolv2 is using simple atomic swaps between sharechain with transactions and BTC.
https://blog.opdup.com/2025/02/04/rebooting-p2pool-for-bitcoin.html
#p2pool

2025-04-26 22:49:37 CEST

- reply

Liana like setups are really cool, but they can be hard to grok for normies.
If cosigner stops signing, doesn't a frost based setup look better then?

2025-04-26 22:35:35 CEST

- reply

The evil uncle! 😂

2025-04-26 12:46:03 CEST

- reply

Good point about the AND. So maybe only one is enough.
The problem with new crypto, is that well, it is new 😉
I wonder if instead of a centralised large entity signing and thus requiring privacy, if we can let people run such services anywhere they want. What we want is plausible deniability of such a service existing for the user. IDK if such fantastical setups are even possible.
Thanks for sharing that there is some work being done on blinded Schnorr sigs. It could get interesting as things mature. Forza! Avanti!

2025-04-26 10:14:03 CEST

Coming soon - vibe reading!

2025-04-26 10:13:35 CEST

- reply

I think they shill the chain as a means to serve AI. A chain to pay ai models, something something

2025-04-26 09:23:14 CEST

- reply

Great to see musig2 coming into production ready tools. I loved the invisible cosigner idea there. I wonder if one could have more than one invisible cosigner? This will reduce risk of the one invisible cosigner being hacked. Then you could have two keys that you control via a ledger and electrum to secure your coins.
Am sure the above is a shitty scheme. So much to think through to be sure schemes are secure.
Can TLA+ help to figure out vulnerabilities in schemes?

2025-04-23 11:43:24 CEST

- reply

Too cute. What happened here? I need some context!

2025-04-08 16:38:44 CEST

"Bitcoin is a movement of people" - Matt Odell
Eric Voskuil has something very similar in the past. Bitcoin lets us resist "by other means", where we share the risk.
Go Bitcoiners!

2025-03-21 08:16:44 CET

- reply

It's not even a question! If a product isn't open source, try not to use it. Especially when it claims to handle your money or your date - which is all uses of software 🤣

2025-03-16 13:34:22 CET

- reply

Agreed, and as the project grows, you still need to know what you are doing, and hopefully by then you do know what you are doing. 😅

2025-03-12 17:42:32 CET

- reply

There is also an economic limitation. More block space you take for making miner payouts, the less you can earn fees for that same space. Plus, it hurts smaller miners. They want to pay fees aggregating small payouts.
Belcher did an excellent job explaining it all in this post: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2135429.0
"Here is an example of a p2pool coinbase transaction: https://blockchain.info/tx/d1a1e125ed332483b6e8e2f128581efc397582fe4c950dc48fadbc0ea4008022
It is 5803 bytes in size, which at a fee rate of 350 sat/b is worth 0.02031050 btc of block space that p2pool cannot sell to any other transaction. As bitcoin inflation goes down and miners are funded more by fees, this puts p2pool at more and more of a disadvantage compared to trusted-third-party mining pools.
As each hasher is paid to their own bitcoin address, this limits the number of hashers taking part as adding more individual people to the payout transaction increases its size. Also small payouts cost a disproportionate amount in miner fees to actually spend, which hurts small miners who are essential to a decentralized mining ecosystem.
This could maybe be solved by keeping a separate balance state for each user that is independent from the payouts, and make payouts only when that balance state exceeds some reasonable threshold. But this increases the variance which goes against the aim of pooled mining."

2025-03-10 10:59:17 CET

- reply

Am thinking of moving blog like posts and annoucement pages for p2pool to nostr. What is the most convenient way to organise these atm? Any suggested tools?

2025-03-10 10:01:23 CET

- reply

Your keys haven't been synched! :) My favourite pain point on matrix. I heard self hosting addresses that problem. How is the experience for you so far?

2025-03-10 10:00:25 CET

Exploring YakoHonne. Really nice interface, plus the attempts to "verified notes" is interesting too.
https://yakihonne.com/article/naddr1qq252nj4w4kkvan8dpuxx6f5x3n9xstk23tkyq3qyzvxlwp7wawed5vgefwfmugvumtp8c8t0etk3g8sky4n0ndvyxesxpqqqp65wpcr66x

2025-03-10 09:32:06 CET

- reply

Thought you had given up on matrix?? Going back to a self hosted on?

2025-03-07 15:30:38 CET

- reply

Exactly, we can use much simpler contracts than LN to provide the trade between the shares on p2pool and BTC. We do need atomicity in the trade though. So miner's shares and buyers BTC are swapped or not, there should be no state in each either of the party is left hanging.
I wonder if we should write down the contracts in the case of doing this swap without ecash and then with ecash. The devil is always in the detail. I am curious how much extra code complexity we need to introduce to use ecash here.
Another point to keep in mind is, since p2pool is a block chain with transactions, we can provide an extra op code in the script engine. So, can we make the transactions even less expensive on the bitcoin chain by using something like CSFS on the p2pool chain? My intuition says it should be possible, but I haven't explored this yet. Still in the weeds of building the p2pool chain.

2025-03-06 10:57:59 CET

First, a cult is the flipside of a wise crowd. The cult patterns seemed accurate, and I watched people applying the cult model to others over and over.
Any intense group, family, business, or team starts to resemble a cult, in little or larger ways.
It's a matter of degree. However, as soon as you spend your free time on someone else's project, you are essentially starting to slide down that slope.
I watched as entire groups went off the rails, unable to think straight or produce accurate results. There was a straight causal effect: as the group became more cult-like, they became more useless.
https://hintjens.wdfiles.com/local--files/books/social-architecture.pdf

2025-03-05 15:56:55 CET

Just asked chatgpt to look up p2pool-v2 repo and write a blog post about changes in the last two weeks.
Pasting verbatim below. The repo is at: https://github.com/pool2win/p2pool-v2
Over the past two weeks, the p2pool-v2 repository has seen significant updates aimed at enhancing its functionality, reliability, and integration with Bitcoin's network. Here's a summary of the key developments:
**1. Enhancements to Bitcoin Integration**
- **Bitcoin Difficulty Assessment**: A new function was introduced to retrieve Bitcoin's current network difficulty. This allows for real-time adjustments to mining operations, ensuring miners are working at appropriate difficulty levels.
- **Share Validation Against Bitcoin Difficulty**: Building upon the difficulty assessment, another function was added to verify if a submitted share meets the Bitcoin network's difficulty criteria. This ensures that only valid shares contribute to the mining process, maintaining the integrity of the pool.
- **Bitcoin Block Verification via RPC**: To bolster security and accuracy, a feature was implemented to verify Bitcoin blocks using Remote Procedure Call (RPC) methods. This allows the system to cross-check blocks against Bitcoin's blockchain, ensuring authenticity and consistency.
**2. Testing and Code Quality Improvements**
- **RPC Error Response Testing**: Comprehensive tests were added to handle potential RPC error responses. This proactive approach ensures that the system can gracefully manage and recover from errors, enhancing overall stability.
- **Configuration Testing**: A dedicated test for configuration settings was introduced. This ensures that any changes to the configuration do not inadvertently disrupt the system's functionality.
- **Dead Code Cleanup**: The codebase underwent a cleanup to remove redundant or unused code segments. This not only streamlines the code but also reduces potential points of failure, leading to a more efficient system.
**3. Network and Connectivity Enhancements**
- **Optional mDNS Implementation**: Multicast DNS (mDNS) was made optional, providing users with flexibility based on their network environments. This is particularly beneficial for setups where mDNS might cause conflicts or is unnecessary.
- **Connection Limits**: To prevent potential overloads and ensure fair resource distribution, connection limits were introduced. This ensures that no single user can monopolize the network resources, promoting a balanced mining environment.
These updates collectively enhance the p2pool-v2's robustness, security, and adaptability, reinforcing its position as a reliable platform for decentralized mining operations.

2025-02-27 07:42:07 CET

- reply

Excellent. Thanks for sharing. I'll read through and come back here.

2025-02-26 10:04:50 CET

How is #p2pool managing payouts? The answer - anyway you want. We can say that because p2pool sharechain uses UTXO set, just like bitcoin and the sharechain transactions use bitcoin Script. The p2pool sharechain thus has a fully compatible bitcoin transaction system.
Our first goal is to provide atomic swaps (onchain) between p2pool sharechain and bitcoin. P2Pool pays a handful of miners and market makers from bitcoin coinbase, the other smaller miners sell their shares to the larger miners/market makers. We need this to avoid the coinbase size limit imposed by antminers.
I wrote a blog post describing this approach with some helpful images 😉
https://blog.opdup.com/2025/02/26/trading-shares-for-bitcoin-user-story.html
Potential scalable payout ideas:
1. Atomic swaps on LN a la boltz exchange
2. Swap shares for e-cash?
3. Atomic swaps via Ark providers?
I left the last two with question marks, cause I don't have a solid handle on them yet. Looking for help here to define and implement these! 😃

2025-02-26 07:23:08 CET

- reply

I published a design a while back for using DLCs to pay miners, where the federation of mining service providers act as the oracle.
https://www.radpool.xyz/1/payout-mechanism.html
Do you have any links on how ecash is locked into a DLC? i haven't read about that.
Regarding swaps, another idea is to run these swaps on LN. I have been told boltz is doing just that.

2025-02-25 21:15:47 CET

- reply

> * Holding Funds On Chain
Did you want to say:
* Holding Funds On Chain controlled by your own key(s)?
I found that a bit ambiguous/confusing on first read.

2025-02-25 19:51:32 CET

- reply

Hey! great to hear from you. I have been meaning to reach out.
The cool thing is that in this reboot, we are adding transactions with UTXOs. So each p2pool "block" encapsulates a share found by a miner. The share block, as I call it in the code, has a coinbase. This coinbase essentially has an output, which can be "spent" by the miner. The output could have any bitcoin Script in it.
Since the p2pool sharechain has exactly the same transactions as bitcoin, miners can spend their UTXOs.
One approach is to atomically swap a bunch of such outputs for bitcoin.
The buyer of the coinbase outputs is later paid for all these outputs by p2pool from the bitcoin block coinbase.
The share block coinbases are only useful for share accounting. Payouts are directly from there bitcoin block coinbases - based on the share accounting from the sharechain coinbase ownership.
I'll give you my coinbase, if you give me bitcoin now, and you'll get paid when the pool's bitcoin coinbase pays out all the buyers of such coinbases (call them market makers).
We will limit the number of outputs on the bitcoin block coinbase so we can stay within antminer limits. That will limit the number of market makers that can trade on the pool.
There is s brief introduction here https://blog.opdup.com/2025/02/04/rebooting-p2pool-for-bitcoin.html
Having said all that, I want to explore other ideas. Given the pool has transaction support, we should be able to do even cooler things - like use ecash for privacy!

2025-02-25 19:35:39 CET

I needed to call getblocktemplate in proposal mode from Rust. The reason is we need to validate blocks that other miners on p2pool are working on.
This ended up talking me longer I had planned. Not a suprise in software development :)
The bitcoin JSON rpc library only handles the template mode, thought I'll submit a patch, but then realised Poelstra has a corepc-types library to help build your own json rpc client.
All that seemed too much hassle in the end.
So now I just invoke the endpoint using jasonrpsee. I ended up keeping things slim and just did the minimal work required to meet my requirement.
On to the next task.
https://github.com/users/pool2win/projects/15
#p2pool

2025-02-25 14:26:04 CET

- reply

In other words, people before tools! Exactly as Eric says.
I also liked his point about war by other means and risk sharing principle.

2025-02-25 14:25:10 CET

- reply

Aren't we all computer scientists here?
Anyhoo, PhD in distributed systems here. Developed a novel consensus protocol back in 2007.
Rebooting P2Pool. LFG!
https://github.com/pool2win/p2pool-v2

2025-02-23 07:43:38 CET

Verification of HotStuff BFT Consensus
Protocol With TLA+/TLC in an Industrial Setting
https://www.shs-conferences.org/articles/shsconf/pdf/2021/04/shsconf_nid2020_01006.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com
#readings

2025-02-23 07:41:34 CET

A TLA+ Formal Proof of a Cross-Chain Swap
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3491003.3491006?utm_source=chatgpt.com

2025-02-22 09:55:00 CET

Codecov has started to terrorise with this new feature!
https://m.primal.net/PGbP.png

2025-02-22 09:52:00 CET

- reply

One has to write test! 😉

2025-02-22 09:50:05 CET

@nprofile…mdf3 Hey guys, the link preview thing always breaks for me. Both on firefox and chrome. Hope the screenshot helps. LMK, if you need more info.
https://m.primal.net/PGbC.png

2025-02-22 09:48:43 CET

P2Pool progress update: We have our node talking to CKPool to receive work blocks and shares found by miners. A detailed blog post is here: https://blog.opdup.com/development-updates/2025/02/17/using-ckpool-solo-for-p2pool-v2.html

2025-02-19 16:48:17 CET

- reply

The golden age of music

2025-02-19 10:39:39 CET

- reply

"If we don't save ourselves, nonce will"
Had to read it again to correct myself.

2025-02-17 16:20:59 CET

- reply

Long term thinking! Something something about time preference 😃

2025-02-11 20:22:34 CET

- reply

The knowledge and experience being built here is invaluable!
Cypherpunks write code, cypherpunks build stuff!
Forza!

2025-02-11 16:53:17 CET

hey @nprofile…fy4z - It is not easy to figure out which repo is used to build the browser extension.
I am looking here: https://github.com/orgs/getAlby/repositories
Thanks for all the excellent work. I am just curious to see the source. 🙏

2025-02-09 10:33:37 CET

- reply

Still loads of challenges ahead! Onwards!

2025-02-09 08:39:24 CET

- reply

Thanks for the covering this important topic. Resisting mining centralisation is a tough challenge, but we need to work on this.
1. Uncle blocks so miners are paid for all their work
2. Transactions on the share chain - so we can swap the shares for BTC using atomic swaps, maybe even on LN.
3. Probably use TIDES like accounting for fair rewards accounting (thanks Sjors for pointing out this direction). Still investigating this.
The coolest thing is that if we have transactions on the sharechain, we open a lot of possibilities to build other payout mechanisms. We might have an ark-p2pool, ln-p2pool, e-cash-p2pool, pick-your-fav-p2pool. This is what really excites me atm.

2025-01-24 17:51:25 CET

- reply

❓ 😕

2024-12-23 02:47:15 CET

- reply

My local baker was upset about losing 2.5% to the payment providers when Italy introduced the "online only payments for every sale over 60 euro". I switched to cash from that day.
If you can't use bitcoin, use cash - became my mantra.

2024-12-20 08:46:28 CET

Ocean validates templates, and therefore Ocean is centralised.
https://x.com/jungly/status/1869975465613767088

2024-12-04 20:48:07 CET

- reply

If bitcoin is already totally unstoppable, then our work is done. We can all go home now. [/sarcasm]
I therefore don't think bitcoin is safe enough yet. We have a lot to do. Mining centralisation is the biggest concern for me of course! Therefore I work on efforts like Braidpool and Radpool.

2024-12-03 13:51:09 CET

Remember the P2Pool servers? You could start mining by simply pointing your stratum url to one of them.
#Radpool service providers are just like that, but with a more formalised role - so they can earn the mining fee from the miners they serve.
Radpool - an open marketplace for pooling services!
https://m.primal.net/MmpX.png

2024-12-01 18:54:36 CET

- reply

मेरी पहली हिंदी पोस्ट, नेस्टर पर।

2024-12-01 18:54:26 CET

Can't find posts in #Hindi here yet। So here we go।
nostr 118n .... let's go!

2024-12-01 17:50:33 CET

- reply

Good point. I'll post news from the slack channel every now and then.
The initial results look very promising! Are you following Eric's tweets on twitter?

2024-12-01 17:14:30 CET

- reply

I actually did spend some time thinking about using FROST for payments over LN, where instead of multi-hop forwarding of HTLC, all parties run a signature scheme together to commit changes in an atomic manner. However, I think instead of FROST, MuSig2 might be a better choice.
I initially thought FROST like threshold signatures could have helped, but the problem is that some parties could collude and cheat the other parties - depending on thresholds etc. Therefore I think MuSig2 can work better. It can replace the need of multi-hop HTLCs. This of course takes away privacy goals of LN.
I did write about it a bit here: https://github.com/pool2win/ln-synctomic/ to log my thoughts. It is kind of a brain dump atm, and probably has some glaring mistakes 😃
I would love to join a brainstorming session/chat around this. I think a lot is possible for L2 payments using either MuSig2 or federations using FROST.

2024-11-29 21:29:39 CET

Collaborative custody will end up empowering control structures rooted in currently existing communities. Control structures that are hierarchical and which take away human freedom.
The principle of voluntary association begs us to stay away from today's societal top down control structures.
Collaborative custody within existing societal structures seems going away from voluntary association.
I am responding to this para from a news article.
"Fedi, which has created a “Community Superapp” that enables collaborative custody of bitcoin"
https://www.forbes.com/sites/frankcorva/2024/11/29/jack-dorsey-backed-african-bitcoin-vc-firm-recursive-capital-closes-raise/

2024-11-29 14:22:26 CET

- reply

I don't remember off the top of my head. Which opcodes do you guys use for the liquid implementation?

2024-11-28 14:24:36 CET

This my third time engaging with #nostr. Each time is been better and more vibrant. 👏🏾👏🏾
A joy to experience the network effect play out in real time.
Here to stay this time.

2024-11-28 14:20:48 CET

- reply

This is exactly the larping by mining pools run by a single entity when they claim to be "decentralised".

2024-11-28 13:23:01 CET

- reply

cashu definitely has a place in the bitcoin ecosystem. critics gonna criticise. Keep building!

2024-11-28 10:23:13 CET

- reply

We should explore decentralised identity here instead. https://www.w3.org/TR/did-core/
OpenID providers are centralised ID providers who devour any data we send to them. Let's try to avoid doing that.
Unless, again, I am missing something.

2024-11-28 10:21:44 CET

- reply

I think this spec will be a mistake. TBH, I am confident once the flaws are pointed out, the spec will be withdrawn. OpenID is just centralised identity. We might be better of exploring DID specs around decentralised identity - https://www.w3.org/TR/did-core/ Harder to build, but lets not talk to OpenID providers!

2024-11-28 09:09:41 CET

- reply

As I understood openid, there needs to be a call back from the open id service to the application - the mint in our case. We should look into how much of a leak this is. Also, please correct me if I am wrong about the call back from open id service provider to the application.

2024-11-27 10:49:58 CET

- reply

Wow. I was curious on the state of affairs, so I got this data set form kaggle and checked the status of validator ofac compliance. Turns out the data is from 2022. It is frustratingly hard to figure out how many validators and relays are non ofac compliant in 2024. The only thing we can do is look at ofac compliant blocks on mevwatch.info.
Ethereum feels like it provides "censorship resistance by obfuscation"

2024-11-27 08:59:07 CET

- reply

The question in my head too.

2024-11-27 08:57:45 CET

- reply

Great news! Do you have a design doc or a repo we can look at yet? Thanks.

2024-11-27 08:56:41 CET

- reply

You should come along to the FROST roundtable. They would love to hear about your work on frostr.

2024-11-27 07:23:46 CET

- reply

That will be much more complicated, from what I understand. let's see where this lands.

2024-11-27 00:46:29 CET

- reply

a big dark cloud is lifted... it was starting to get scary out there

2024-11-26 14:11:10 CET

Bitcoin miners be like
https://m.primal.net/Mhqb.png
So how do you decentralise block template construction?
Possible answer: https://www.radpool.xyz/

2024-11-26 13:09:38 CET

- reply

The second FROST roundtable is happening on Dec 4th. I'll present my progress on FROST Federation https://github.com/pool2win/frost-federation
The federation work is motivated by Radpool - an effort to decentralise mining template construction and FPPS like payouts for miners. https://www.radpool.xyz/
Roundtable announcement: https://x.com/ChristopherA/status/1861047373419491661

2024-11-26 09:06:36 CET

- reply

Today is the first day of the rest of your life.

2024-11-25 22:30:40 CET

- reply

The cool thing, I think, is that we are not inventing new crypto or new distributed systems protocols. There is lot of engineering effort, yes, but we can do it. I believe it is doable. 😃 Have to believe!

2024-11-25 17:54:12 CET

- reply

The threat is legit.

2024-11-25 17:52:08 CET

- reply

tbh, I am using the federation for a mining pool design, where the payout is a DLC contract. The federation acts as an oracle, and voila, the miner gets a unilateral exit, with DLC backed payout guaranteed as long as 1) miner produces hashrate and 2) federation remains honest and signs the attestation.
I have been wracking my brains to see if we can do anything with the federation for an L2 payment mechanism.
I see two problems, a) without PoW how do you keep federation honest and not start sybil attacking b) does it really do anything useful at all, as you asked the question too. I have this uncanny feeling someone somewhere will figure this out. Threshold signatures are way too cool to not give us an interesting future.

2024-11-25 15:03:23 CET

- reply

The innovation has to move off chain

2024-11-25 14:59:01 CET

- reply

> TLDR someone needs to find a kickass off chain (L2 if you like) protocol that could 50x the usage of bitcoin using covenants, *without centralization *, then needs to write code and deploy it on say Liquid and signet.
A Federated L2 could be interesting where the federation is not limited to Liquid where the federation is limited to regulated parties.
Instead, what if we have a federation managed by a threshold signature that could grow to 50-100 parties to help execute state changes for coinpool.
Such an federation is possible using a Schnorr Threshold Signature. I am building one for a mining pool, where the federation membership is backed by PoW. How such a federation can minimise trust without PoW is a question I am thinking about these days.
Meanwhile - unashamed link share to my repo: https://github.com/pool2win/frost-federation

2024-11-25 14:48:19 CET

https://m.primal.net/Mguv.png

2024-11-25 14:45:02 CET

Radpool - a new design to decentralise bitcoin mining.
https://m.primal.net/Mguk.png https://www.radpool.xyz/

2024-10-15 17:27:37 CEST

You give me hashes, I'll give you bitcoin.
https://m.primal.net/LWnB.png

2024-08-21 21:44:52 CEST

Chris Belcher described a payout construction for P2Pool back in the day that allowed P2Pool to scale. There was a problem, the construction required a central hub. Wth FROST we can replace the centralised hub with a federation. That was an intuition I had for almost a year now. I finally found the time and I think I have it figured out. Will share something soon.
Meanwhile here's Belcher's construction: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2135429.0