I prefer 'ethical' to moral. Slightly different connotation.

Well, maybe. I guess I am only talking about a cognitive error of ordinary non powerful people, who are indeed trying to be moral or ethical.

Yeah sorry not going to work for a while

Yes it needs a soft fork. The important thing is there's a solid theoretical basis for actually doung CISA. Experience with MuSig taught us you have to be super careful building these algos ... the power that Schnorr's linearity gives you is a double edged sword.

Interesting read. It doesn't sound easy to do this across a country... but maybe I'm wrong.

Interesting. On tor, isn't it already the case that the (large?) majority of reachable nodes are over tor? I don't follow these stats regularly.

At least it's honest. 90% of content is generated like this, but without telling you.

Interesting. If we think of LN, we have that: not only ability to withdraw, but also ability to maintain currently held funds, passively, can be violated even without 51% attack but merely through censorship by miners, or even pure unavailability or pricing out through fees > available balance. Hence someone put it in some pithy statement that I can't remember along the lines of "in Lightning censorship resistance is a security requirement" (meh I can't remember exactly but you get it). But then is that overlapping with a 51% attack, or not? I always thought of the latter as specifically referring to attempts to "undo" payments, so changing inclusion and/or ordering of txs. I think I'm trying to say that, with this definition, even LN doesn't count as an L2, does it?

How is that helpful? An AI can run a mining rig. One person can claim to be a thousand, running a thousand miners. Etc.

In the digital realm, there is no solution to Sybil attacks other than cost, and there is no *real* solution to decentralized currency other than proof of work.

Yeah I'm only doubting in the technical domain. Something like claude doesn't in any sense brown nose when it comes to some technical idea or description; if I'm directly wrong, it'll say so. It's a more subtle but strong tendency to end up at the conclusion that I tangentially implied, but actually I don't know if it's true. That kind of thing.

Imo, people are rarely *this* sycophantic, or, they are not very useful if they are (i.e. people with this extreme high functionality aren't anything like this agreeable).