Peter Todd

In a similar spirit to my now decade old segwit consensus code review, I (and one of my clients) thought it would be worthwhile to do a code review of the consensus parts of the Knots BIP-110 implementation, to ensure there are no surprises when it activa…

Is OpenTimestamps incompatible with or threatened by the Bitcoin Knots fork of Bitcoin Core and/or the OCEAN mining pool?

I was asked by Kruw to analyze and respond to Yuval “nothingmuch” Kogman’s post1 on centralized, coordinator-based, deanonymization attacks.

An unintuitive aspect of the Lightning protocol is that channels in the middle of your route don’t have to be real.

With the recent success of Starship’s 5th and 6th test flights, mining Bitcoin in space and data centers in space have gotten renewed attention.

On-chain wallets achieve a roughly 1-1 mapping of transactions to transactions: for every economic transaction that a user performs, roughly one blockchain transaction is needed.

I recently released a prototype Libre Relay fork of Bitcoin Core v26.0, that among other things, implements Pure Replace-By-Fee-Rate (RBFR) with a 2x ratio.

Currently Bitcoin Core implements a Replace-by-Fee (RBF) policy, where transactions are not replaced unless the new transaction pays at least a higher total fee than the replaced transaction, regardless of fee-rate.

V3 transactions is a proposed set of mempool policies with the aim of allowing transactions to use Child-Pays-For-Parent (CPFP), anchor outputs, and package relay as the primary method of paying for fees in contracting protocols such as Lightning.

V3 Transactions1 is a set of transaction relay policies intended to aim L2/contracting protocols, namely Lightning.