nehan
Joined 16 years ago
Karma
145
Submissions
36
Member since
May 18
Recent submissions
Comment · 1 month ago
"While unlikely, we cannot rule out that de-identified data derived from their usage of our products helped improve our models."
I think they should be able to unravel whether or not any sessions by Tristan or Levent went into the training data for this model.
Comment · 6 months ago
excellent point! I agree.
Comment · 6 months ago
I can't think of heuristics available on the Bitcoin P2P network that would be helpful for this, but I'm curious if you have any in mind.
Comment · 6 months ago
Sorry I wasn't clear there. Because most of the short-depth is controlled by centralized exchanges, there's a risk you won't be able to actualize your short (withdraw, either in crypto or to a bank account), even if it's successful -- they could just block you from withdrawing and/or report you for fraud.
Comment · 6 months ago
The point is you can't distinguish transactions that are from an "attacker" when the underlying signature scheme is broken. The Bitcoin P2P network has some metrics to disconnect from nodes that might be trying to DoS you, but if a transaction has enough fees, is spending unspent coins, and has a valid signature, it's valid.
Comment · 6 months ago
Also, LetsEncrypt is very cool! Thanks for working on it.
Comment · 6 months ago
This work is important, and I'm looking forward to forming an opinion on it. Maybe a future post! For those who are interested, this is what I'm aware of:
- Tim Ruffing proved that Taproot's commitment scheme was quantum-resilient: https://eprint.iacr.org/2025/1307
- Jonas Nick and Mikhail Kudinov have proposed SHRINCS: https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/shrincs-324-byte-stateful-post-... and SHRIMPS: https://x.com/n1ckler/status/2038695067754328095.
Comment · 6 months ago
two things:
1) Short markets in Bitcoin don't have unlimited depth, and the centralized ones are KYC'd so there's some risk there 2) What if it doesn't tank the price? One thing people have suggested is just burning all the vulnerable coins[1]; it reduces supply so maybe the price will... go up? The point is there's uncertainty.
Comment · 5 years ago
This isn't a proposal for a US CBDC. It's research on technical tradeoffs that might need to be addressed in a hypothetical CBDC.
http://nehanarula.org