Notable changes this week in Bitcoin Core, C-Lightning, Eclair, LND, Rust-Lightning, libsecp256k1, Hardware Wallet Interface (HWI), Rust Bitcoin, BTCPay Server, BDK, Bitcoin Improvement Proposals (BIPs), and Lightning BOLTs. This week’s newsletter describes a recently fixed interoperability issue between different LN software and includes our regular sections with a list of new releases and release candidates plus notable changes to popular Bitcoin infrastructure software. Also included are our regular sections with popular questions and answers from the Bitcoin Stack Exchange, announcements of new releases and release candidates, and summaries of notable changes to popular Bitcoin infrastructure software. The new desc fields are not expected to be particularly useful at the moment as they can currently only be used with the scantxoutset RPC, but they will provide a compact way of providing all the information necessary for making addresses solvable to future and upgraded RPCs for Bitcoin Core such as those used for interactions between offline/online (cold/hot) wallets, multisig wallets, coinjoin implementations, and other cases. The salted hash function used for shortids is designed to efficiently create compact ids, but is not guaranteed to be secure against collisions if an attacker can control what the salt is.

A connection’s reconciliation salt is the combination of both peers’ locally-generated salts and is used to create shortids for each transaction. Fee free fast - transfers utilizing a multi-blockchain core database along with an account ledger we have been able to get the transaction time down to below 30 seconds and scaled it to 50,000 transactions a second in a test suite (the same operating capacity as VISA). Since I have an account at Binance, you can probably send any reasonable coin/token out there. Andrew Chow notes that as more diverse and complicated scripts become more widely used and for separation of concern reasons, there is no taproot equivalent for xpub/ypub/zpub. Theoretically, is it possible for a mainnet chain that has taproot never-active or active at a different block height to exist? On Jan. 3, 2009, the first Bitcoin block was mined-Block 0. This is also known as the "genesis block" and contains the text: "The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks," perhaps proof that the block was mined on or after that date, and maybe also as relevant resource site political commentary.

In 2009, Bitcoin was launched as a "peer-to-peer electronic cash system" by a person with the alias Satoshi Nakamoto. Gregory Maxwell asks and answers a question about you could create a value that looked like an ECDSA signature corresponding to an arbitrary public key-such as one known to belong to Satoshi Nakamoto-but without having access to the private key. Because the key was generated without any additional data ("tweaking"), your wallet doesn’t need any extra data in order to find and spend your funds. Thus it removed the need to perform extra checks for duplicates. This does require storing extra data and being very careful about ensuring your signing software or hardware can’t be tricked into unknowingly repeating part of the signing session. Ensuring that fee bumping works reliably is a requirement for the safety of most contract protocols, and it remains a problem without any comprehensive solution yet. 1176 adds initial support for anchor outputs-style fee bumping.

Initial Block Download and syncing blocks before taproot activation. 1 segwit (taproot) spends regardless of taproot activation status. If the threshold were reached after the min activation height but before the timeout, taproot could also activate at a later height. What mempool validation function checks if a transaction spends a taproot input? When a multisignature is used for a keypath spend, it is indistinguishable from single-sig spends. The decrease in size leads to direct reduction in fees for the multisignature users and an indirect reduction in fees for all users as the same amount of demand for confirmed transactions can be fulfilled using a smaller amount of block space. But with more bitcoins in circulation, people also expect transaction fees to rise, possibly making up the difference. ● LN reliability versus fee parameterization: Joost Jager started a thread on the Lightning-Dev mailing list about how to best allow users to choose between paying more fees for faster payments or waiting longer to save money. By default, most remote nodes discourage such attempts by setting a reasonable channel reserve, but some Lightning Service Providers (LSPs) use low or zero channel reserves order to provide users with a better experience-allowing them to spend 100% of the funds in the channel.