patrickthebold

I think the way that the bits are counted is based on the pool from which the number was randomly drawn. So it's possible they had 256 bits of entropy but got really unlucky.

Unlikely. The digital signatures bitcoin uses are regarded as secure, (there could be attacks if we get quantum computers.) The issue here was the software didn't put in enough randomness when generating the keys, and so it was straight forward to search the small space of keys the wallet would generate.

It's not so different if you encrypted a file with a weak password and someone guessed it—you don't need stronger encryption, you need to pick a better password.

The proof of work part of bitcoin is really for "consensus", so everyone agrees which transactions happened in which order, this attack didn't affect that part at all.

JSON String requires escaping of control characters. .toString() on a String is (hopefully) the identity.

So, maybe we could consider a "White Hat" ransomware group that takes the money and also leaks the data, so that long term no one bothers to pay which ultimately disincentivizes ransomware attacks?

Somewhat off topic, but I've always wanted to know _who_ gets my tax dollars more than what they were spent on. For example, a middle class salary to someone building bombs in Ohio is different than a wealthy investor who owns shares in some educational company that provides standardized tests to local public schools.

I'm not sure I follow your workflow exactly. If PR B is merged, then I'd expect PR A to already be merged (I'd normally branch off of A to make B.)

That said, after the squash merge of A and git fetch origin, you want something like git rebase --update-refs --onto origin/main A C (or whatever the tip of the chain of branches is)

The --update-refs will make sure pr B is in the right spot. Of course, you need to (force) push the updated branches. AFAICT the gh command line tool makes this a bit smoother.

Yes, I really wanted to post the comment and I (wrongly) thought this post got blocked by my procrastination setting. Apologies for the noise.

This is interesting to think about: For gold I'd say the demand is coming from both industries and from people who want it as a store of value. If it was only used as an industrial chemical, then surely the price would drop because there would be less demand.

Some bitcoin advocates will talk about how useful it is as a currency, and I wonder how much bitcoin is actually used for purposes other then to hope you can sell it to someone else for more than you paid.

I'd be good to give an example of where the 'only if' doesn't apply. If only to clear up the confusion.

of course 9.99...(repeating) is mathematically 10, so I have a hard time being against allowing that.