Ah yes, perfect, that's exactly it. I remember btw thinking that that exact mechanism is going to be needed in LN gossip too. And basically every anon network. Btw do you have any knowledge about the deployment of this feature. There seems to be some confusion about licensing and compiling it; is it definitely available in 0.4.8; will it be switched on by default at some point?

Anyone running recent Tor builds with HiddenServicePoWDefensesEnabled set to true? What I'm mostly confused about is if onions have it switched on but their clients are on older versions or just incompatible versions, how does that work? #tor

To be fair it's a pretty strong trend here too.

In most of Europe make that more like 2-3K.

I didn't even know there were non-kyc debit cards at all 😁

Oh, interesting. How?

It may well be a clear cut crime, but bear in mind you are taking their word for it. They have straight up lied in many similar cases.

The whole "forced labor" angle in this story feels really suspicious and weird.

Nothing. But as a signalling mechanism, it's trivial to Sybil.

This is false. Bitcoin didn't have an 80 byte op_return limit before; there was no change to the rules.

That's a good point about futures and exchanges. We need a mechanism to bet on the fork outcome inside bitcoin transactions. I think there was some research into that years ago. Hopefully the mechanism doesn't use OP_RETURN 😁

It's possible you're a bit confused about the relationship of op_return and segwit? There's an op_return *in the coinbase transaction* for committing to the witnesses in the block; that's separate from general 'segwit outputs'. OP_RETURN is just another kind of output. The op_return in the coinbase is just a commitment of bytes, there'd be no need, in a soft fork to ban op_returns, to remove it (true that it would present a technical question to address: if we banned op_return there'd either need to be an exception for coinbase transactions, or a kind of renaming of that 32 byte commitment so it's no longer called op_return. IIUC the only reason the slightly clunky choice of op_return for that commitment was made, is because you can't add to the block header itself, without a hard fork).

It's an algorithm for agreement under conditions of extremely weak "coupling" (using the term how physicists use it).