Imposters of "customer support" who insist that you need to share your seed phrase with them.

Even if you were talking to a real customer support staffer, you still shouldn't trust them with your money.

The difference between Lightning and Ark explains this design choice.

With Lightning, your channel stays open indefinitely, and you can only lose funds if your channel peer cheats while you are offline for the duration of your timelock.

With Ark, you lose your funds automatically if you go offline without continuously refreshing your timelock with a VTXO swap.

tl:dr, Lightning users can only lose funds to an active attacker + negligence, while Ark users can lose funds to negligence alone (hence the email contact).

Ark and Lightning aren't the same thing.

fees are low (~3 sats/vByte)

Fees are only 0.13 sat/vbyte.

Square just made accepting bitcoin transactions default-on for all its terminals

No they didn't. Square is refusing to do this because accepting Bitcoin is "reckless": https://x.com/tmknsm/status/2038657001694118274

Cross Input Signature Aggregation is underrated. Make coinjoins look less like clown cars and more like buses.

Christian Decker has a PhD in Bitcoin, his thesis was "On the Scalability and Security of Bitcoin"

Robin Linus is also pursuing one.

Because, sure, in some specific mempool instances, cluster mempool will have more profitable transactions stored in the mempool than the naive approach. But how frequently does that happen in real life?

Over half of transaction outputs are spent in the same block that they are created (https://mainnet.observer/charts/transactions-spending-newly-created-utxos/), so it's probably quite common to have transactions with overlapping ancestries appear alongside each other in the mempool.

The main purpose of cluster mempool is to make more profitable block templates. Smarter eviction is just a beneficial side effect from applying the new method to both the top and bottom of your node's mempool.

On chain Bitcoin is slow, expensive, and isn't private. You can use coinjoins to transact on chain anonymously, but then it's even slower and even more expensive.

Lightning fixes all of this since it's fast, cheap, and private. But this layer introduces a new set of tradeoffs like requiring continuous Internet connectivity, channel liquidity management, and annoyances like force close timelocks.

No.

Drivechains didn't even make it on the list, Paul Sztorc in shambles rn.

One steelman argument for Ordinals being a BIP is that sats of certain "rarity" levels are awarded directly to miners. (Of course, all sats are directly awarded to miners, but follow me here...)

Since the choice to split & sell these sats marginally affects the profitability of miners who obtain them, it is worth documenting how they are identified.

If anyone could challenge instead of 1 of n, would you change your mind?

As far as I know, they haven't marketed themselves as self-custodial. I asked one of the Citrea cofounders specifically about their "trust minimized" setup - https://x.com/Kruwed/status/2032221603568787501

F2pool currently only mines transactions that pay at least 0.3 sat/vbyte.

Similarly, ViaBTC only mines transactions that pay at least 1 sat/vbyte.

You put Bitcoin & stablecoins in the same category: https://x.com/MattAhlborg/status/2028831326783049903

A long time ago, I commissioned a Core developer to draft the code change to disable assumevalid by default: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commits/8d9e5060559c6b501fedac362aa4efc7d2dbd726/

He should fire LukeDashjr and Mechanic from OCEAN too.

I used v0.2.0 with a test key for a 1 on 1 chat and it worked smoothly. I didn't run it enough to notice battery drain though.