https://www.wsj.com/articles/crypto-lender-celsius-names-fahrenheit-as-winning-chapter-11-bidder-40c3c3e5

An update to the Celsius saga -- it appears that Celsius is going to distribute it's crypto holdings to its customers, and will own nearly all of the new company that will exit Chapter 11 bankruptcy. A company called "Fahrenheit" will manage the illiquid holdings of Celsius.

From what I can tell from the article, it appears that Celsius is going to be effectively liquidated, and the assets that could not be easily liquidated will be managed by Fahrenheit for the benefit of Celsius customers.

I think maybe, Jet Cash got the proposal backward.

---

Either way, I don't think it is possible to implement what the OP is proposing.

It is important to remember that the "mempool" is just a localized set of valid transactions that are not yet confirmed, according to a node's current understanding of the blockchain. There is no historical mempool, although there are some projects that store some historical information about the status of their nodes' mempools.

If the maximum block size is nkb and there are nkp worth of valid transactions in a pool's mempool, it is reasonable to expect the pool to confirm all transactions in the mempool, even if there is a wide variety of transaction fee rates among transactions. So if there was a requirement for pools to include certain valid transactions prior to accepting other valid transactions, it would not be possible to validate if a particular block is valid after the fact.

This appears to be somewhat of a moot point, because it looks like the underlying issue has resolved itself.

If something similar pops up in the future, I think a good first step would be to reach out to the image hosting site in question to see if they can provide a solution that doesn’t compromise privacy. Perhaps they would be willing to whitelist the forums image proxy.

If the above fails, I think forum members should have the individual option to choose between 2 and 3, with 2 being the default and for guests. If someone understands the privacy implications and is willing to allow Imgur to know their IP address is associated with someone who accesses the forum, they can have reduced privacy in exchange for being able to see the original images.

There are many forum members who very much value their privacy and they likely don’t want Imgur knowing that their IP address accessed the forum.

I don't agree with the conclusion, but if the government concludes someone has broken the law, and if the crime is sufficiently serious, the person who broke the law will be arrested and charged with the crime in question.

It is trivial for someone to access an arbitrary number of IP addresses. It is also normal for many legitimate users of various services to access a changing IP address.

I wasn’t even given the opportunity to solve a captcha

Edit :lmao. This is more effective than chat gpt

Why are we not using chat gpt to check if someone is a spammer?

Either private key can spend from the address.

For all intents and purposes, the chances of this happening are zero.

If you have multiple nodes, it will make little sense to have the nodes in the same general location. Transferring data to different servers will cost money.

The idea would be that you would fully download the blockchain on a "traditional" pruned node, then use assumeutxo to transfer a trivial amount of data to the 4 other nodes (assuming 5 nodes in total).

In general, it makes sense for businesses to run multiple full nodes for redundancy, and to prevent various attacks.

If a business wants to run 5 full nodes, under the status quo, they will have to download the blockchain 5 times. From my understanding of the proposal in the OP, a business could potentially download the blockchain once, and transfer the current UTXO set to the other 4 nodes using a trivial amount of resources.

As acho101 pointed out, assumeutxo requires trust in the entity that provides the current UTXO set as of x block. In theory, some of this required trust could be reduced via means that are done to provide trust to light wallet users, such as electrum users.

When an ASIC is performing work, there will be some variance in the number of hashes it performs per unit of time. A general rule of thumb is that short-term averages may deviate 10% or so from the long-term average when measuring the hashes per unit of time.

It has never been any secret that any given CM coins were associated with CM. This has always been the case thanks to blockchain analysis. I don't see any reason why CM being seized would change anything about any previously received coin from CM.

Perhaps, although doing so would be less efficient. I think the point remains that this will encourage people to reuse addresses when doing so is a bad practice

I think the data is either some kind of logs or multiple copies of the bitcoin blockchain. The former would be used to trace coin associated with actual crimes and the later would be included in the complaint to scare others into potentially cooperating with law enforcement

I really can’t think of anything else that CM might be storing on their server

Vanity addresses are really the only realistic use-case for an ASIC that generates bitcoin addresses.

I admit that I often violate this recommendation, but bitcoin addresses really shouldn't be reused, and vanity addresses encourage people to break this rule.

For a mixer, it would probably be better if they did periodically delete private keys. Blockchain analysis can help find most of the addresses associated with CM, but there are likely some it can't find. Deleting private keys will prevent anyone with access to the server from knowing 100% of addresses associated with CM.

With that being said, CM did not promise (to my knowledge) to delete old private keys. But also, I think it is unlikely that CM had 6 TB worth of private keys stored on their servers.

I also hope that DS doesn't get in trouble for his role in being the campaign manager for CM. I can only speculate if he will get in any kind of trouble. My best guess is that law enforcement will look into him, but ultimately not pursue any charges against him.

If charges were filed against DS, the reason law enforcement would have waited 6 years would be to not tip off the operator that law enforcement was coming after them.

In order for the NY AG to indict Trump on a felony charge, he is going to have to employ a novel legal theory that may very well end up not working.

edit: Then again, he would be tried in NYC, and the jury may simply decide "Orange man bad" and may be willing to convict him, even without a prosecution.

Geeze, lamo. That is a bit much for my eyes. 🤣

It is not a good security practice to transmit actual private keys between servers.

Notwithstanding the above, if someone can cause CM to belive that they have a chip, they effectively have access to the coin. So if someone were to trick CM into believing that coin was deposited, when in fact it was not, and they were able to do so in a way that CM could not differentiate from legitimate deposits, CM would need to either not honor all legitimate deposits, or ultimately honor the illegitimate deposits.
Over 7 TB of data was taken from CM. I would want to know what the other 99% of this data was.

I don't think it is really possible for a mixer to not store all their coin in their hot wallet. If CM used cold wallets, moving coin to/from the cold wallet really couldn't be done on-chain, otherwise, it would be clear which groups of addresses belong to CM. Also, CM's operational model effectively put all their coin on a hot wallet, regardless of the location of it's private keys due to the fact that CM had such a low threshold for someone to get a "chip", which is effectively an IOU from CM to their customers -- all that is needed is a browser session.