Re: [bitcoin-dev] a simple and easy-to-remember personalized mnemonic generation scheme

2023-11-07 Thread symphonicbtc via bitcoin-dev
Hi Joe, Happy to see engagement in evolving wallet systems. Unfortunately, BIP39 was devised precisely to avoid users picking their own phrases, as that is extremely insecure and cannot be expected to generate sufficient entropy to protect coins. Humans are inherently bad sources of randomness

Re: [bitcoin-dev] BitVM: Compute Anything on Bitcoin

2023-10-09 Thread symphonicbtc via bitcoin-dev
Hello Robin, I'm very interested in this development, as I've been longing for arbitrary smart contracts on bitcoin for a while. I've got a couple questions I'd like to ask, on behalf of myself and some others I've been discussing this with. 1. Do you have plans to implement a high-level langua

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Concern about "Inscriptions"

2023-08-21 Thread symphonicbtc via bitcoin-dev
It is important to also note that proof of secret key schemes are highly data inefficient and likely would have a higher cost for users than simply allowing arbitrary data to continue. In ECDSA, purposely re-using k values allows you to encode data in both k and the entire secret key, as both be

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Concrete MATT opcodes

2023-08-21 Thread symphonicbtc via bitcoin-dev
Hi Antoine, It is important to consider that miners are not always incentivized by what brings them the most profit in the moment, but also their long-term prospects. If they begin participating in transaction censorship, they open the possibility of reducing the value of the coins they mine an

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Concrete MATT opcodes

2023-08-14 Thread symphonicbtc via bitcoin-dev
> I think cross-input inspection (not cross-input signature aggregation which > is different) is opening a pandora box in terms of "malicious" off-chain > contracts than one could design. E.g miners bribing contracts to censor the > confirmation of time-sensitive lightning channel transactions,

Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP for Serverless Payjoin (AdamISZ)

2023-08-11 Thread symphonicbtc via bitcoin-dev
Hey Dan, Very interested in such a protocol finally becoming standardized. Quick little nit I noticed as well, are you sure base64 encoding is the best choice for the psk in the URI? You may find that having to urlencode the special characters in base64 it impacts readability and adds a layer o

Re: [bitcoin-dev] segwit naming ambiguity

2023-08-11 Thread symphonicbtc via bitcoin-dev
Transactions should be considered segwit if they match the witness program structure of "A scriptPubKey (or redeemScript as defined in BIP16/P2SH) that consists of a 1-byte push opcode (for 0 to 16) followed by a data push between 2 and 40 bytes" as defined in [BIP141](https://github.com/bitcoi