|
There is a report that Russia is willing to have peace talks with Ukrainian leadership.
Separately, western governments are saying that it appears the invasion is moving more slowly than Russia had anticipated.
|
|
|
|
I told you so.
You were right about where Russia's military was going to attack from. We will see if Putin stops with Ukraine or if he continues west. The information on what's happening is very spotty. Is it possible that Russia "only" did some airstrikes, but they're not going to send in any ground troops outside of the eastern territories? I heard a rumor that Putin gave Zelenskyy an ultimatum to cede eastern Ukraine within 12 hours or else Putin would continue with a full invasion, but I don't know if this comes from a reliable source. I think this would be unlikely. Before the attacks started, Zelensky tried calling Putin, but he did not answer, and Zelensky had publicly stated that he would be willing to negotiate for peace. I don't see any reason why Putin wouldn't make this demand before starting military action, as starting military action is risky, even for a dictator. Being that there has been an insurgency in eastern Ukraine for years now, I don't think Zelensky would have been strongly opposed to giving eastern Ukraine in exchange for peace. There are reports of a Russian "hit squad" whose intentions are to kill Zelensky and his family. If these reports are accurate, it would remove credence to Putin offering peace in exchange for Eastern Ukraine. Or at least that any such offer would be credible. It'd definitely be possible for Ukraine to fight off Russia with a years-long insurgency. The West will be giving them endless supplies, so Russia would have a much harder time than the US had against Afghanistan, for example. But I don't know if the Ukrainians have the will to fight Russia for years, and I don't know that I'd even recommend that they do so, since the costs of this sort of insurgency would be so high. The Russian economy is approximately 1.5% the size of the US economy. I don't think Russia would be able to finance a years-long insurgency the same way that the US did in Afghanistan. Sanctions against Russia will make it more difficult to continue to finance any war in Ukraine or elsewhere in eastern Eurpoe. Russia's big stick is its large stockpile of nukes. If not for their nukes, a war against Russia would be trivial to win because they lack the manufacturing capacity to continue to produce weapons that are needed for war.
The Ukraine government has asked its citizens to make Molotov cocktails. If citizens make these (and use them against the Russian military) in large enough numbers, the invasion would quickly get expensive for Russia in terms of soldiers and military equipment.
Russia was able to take control of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant that is currently decommissioned. Putin likely wants control over this site because it would potentially provide an easy path to Kiev.
There were anti-war protests in Russia yesterday (Thursday), which is especially noteworthy because Russia does not tolerate dissent.
Biden was reportedly presented with options to launch a cyber-attack against Russia in response to the invasion of Ukraine. In what may or may not be related, the hacking group "Anonymous" has said they are in the process of attacking Russia via cyber attacks. This raises the question if "Anonymous" is actually an apparatus of the US intelligence agencies and/or US government. |
|
|
|
If you are comparing storing a backup using medium A and medium B, in order to compare the two mediums, you need to assume the same security measures are taken, unless doing so would not be possible. If you are comparing which storage medium is more secure once they have been created, then sure, you assume they are both created securely. But in reality, that is not the case. Almost anyone can write down a seed phrase securely - just make sure you do it with nobody else around and no cameras or webcams pointed at what you are doing. Very few people on the other hand can properly create an encrypted USB drive back up from a properly airgapped computer, leaving no traces of what they have done and leaking no information in the process. This is an important point to consider. Writing down a seed still requires some kind of computer-like device to generate the seed. If the seed was generated on a HW wallet, then perhaps storing a seed on a USB drive would require an additional computer. However, if you remove that assumption, using a USB drive requires no additional security measures above using a paper backup. Just as if we compare a properly created paper wallet to a properly created software wallet, then the paper wallet is exponentially more secure. However, we know from experience that many people who create paper wallets or import them later do insecurely because they far harder to create and use than a simple software wallet. This is not true. I am assuming you are referring to a wallet that is not a hardware wallet. If you compare the potential security risks associated with creating (and using) a paper wallet, and a wallet stored on an encrypted hard drive or USB drive, using a paper wallet would have all the security vulnerabilities associated with a seed stored on an encrypted hard drive or USB drive, and would also have additional security vulnerabilities. Every medium of storage has the potential for data loss under certain circumstances, and the only way to mitigate this risk is to use multiple storage mediums. This is also mitigated by using multiple storage locations, not just mediums. If the circumstance is, for example, all my paper wallets are vulnerable to fire or water damage (which is no different to a USB drive), then I am far safer storing two paper copies in two physical locations in different states than I am storing a paper and a USB copy a few blocks from each other. I will advise people to follow the 3-2-1 rule: 3 backups using 2 mediums of storage, with at least 1 backup stored off-site When comparing your two choices, you are changing two variables, the number of mediums of storage and the distance each backup is located from the other. The variable that increases the benefit in your comparison is the distance between backups, not using a single medium of storage. |
|
|
|
No matter what anyone says, there is only one scenario in which Russia dares to make this move, but the first step should be made by the EU and not Russia. A scenario in which the EU and the US at this very second will introduce the maximum possible package of sanctions, something like a sanction against North Korea. In the meantime, the EU and the US act with caution by introducing phased sanctions against Russia, Ukrainians have nothing to fear.
Russia supplies 11% of the world's oil and supplies much of Europe's natural gas. It is simply not possible to impose that level of sanctions against Russia. Maybe Paul Manafort will get called in to help a pro Russian candidate get elected to office in one of the Baltic states.
Maybe Putin should consider hiring Hunter Biden to get a favorable response to any Russian aggression in the region. Latvia and Lithuania are some of the countries that will be next.
Arent these countries under protection of NATO? Starting annexation, invasion, war will trigger massive war actions on the whole territory of Europe. And with the current weaponry, there will be no winner in this war. I don't think Putin is daring enough to try to invade either country, or even position military forces in a way that might look like he is going to invade either country. Russian troops know they can win a war against Ukraine. The same is not true with NATO. Trying to position itself to attack a county it cannot win may result in troops abandoning their posts in large numbers, which would threaten Putin's grip on power. Reality has little to do with the perception of team 'Lets go Brandon'. With a steady diet of right wing media anything Biden, and by extension in this case the West in general, does will be weak. And they're tip toeing up to the line of showing admiration openly for the way Putin gets things done. Trump has already signaled it's ok to admire Putins ways. He has for years, of course, but never while Putin was literally invading an ally unprovoked.
Putin never invaded any country while Trump was in office. He pretty much started getting his troops into position as soon as Biden was elected.
There appear to be air strikes and/or bombings in Kiev. |
|
|
|
This is just for you. In my history I see reports that begins in early February. Counted the number of reports. There are exactly 5000 lines in my post history. Consequently, the restriction occurred not by date, but by the number of lines. It would be interesting to know from those who have a lot of sent reports in the last 30 days, do they have the same limit of 5000 lines now?
UPD: I sent 50 fresh reports right now and counted the history of reports. The result is the same: exactly 5000 lines. That is, the limit is now on the number of reports in history. It remains to be seen if this is the case for everyone. Based on the publicly available number of reports handled every month, I don't believe that anyone else is reporting in as high of a volume as you are, nor is anyone reporting in excess of 5000 posts per month. In the year period ending in ~ mid-September 2021, actmyname reported an average of ~3100 posts per month. I am not sure how these reports were distributed over the year, but he is the only one that would even theoretically come close to exceeding your 5000 reports ina month. I checked my report log, and it goes back 30 days and contains ~1000 reports. |
|
|
|
I would also bring up that it is a best practice to store backups of your seed phrase in multiple mediums of storage. So if you do decide to store one copy that is written on paper, you should store another copy of your seed in some medium of storage, such as an encrypted USB stick or encrypted HDD. This way if your ink does fade, you will hopefully still have access to your other backups. I understand the reasoning behind this, and if that makes you feel safer and/or fits with your threat model, then by all means go ahead. But again, as I discussed above regarding steel back ups, I find this unnecessary. Lets say that I have three copies of a seed phrase, all hand written on paper (using good quality ink and good quality paper), stored in three separate physical locations. I know that under the reasonable conditions of temperature, humidity, etc., that the copy stored on site in my house will experience, I'm going to get decades out of it before the ink fades to any significant degree. In terms of my offsite back ups, I'm still checking on them at least every few months so I know if they have been compromised or damaged in any way. Even assuming these offsite backups are exposed to such environmental extremes that the ink fades in only a year, I'll find out before they become unreadable and will be able to replace then as needed. If you have created your seed phrase on an airgapped device then there is little additional risk to creating a back up of your seed phrase on an encrypted USB drive. But very few people do this. If you have, on the other hand, created your seed phrase on a hardware wallet, which thousands if not millions more people do, then creating an encrypted USB drive back up poses a significant additional risk since most people do not have a properly airgapped device with which to do so. You make good points, but I think your points are outside of the scope of the OP's question/problem. If you are comparing storing a backup using medium A and medium B, in order to compare the two mediums, you need to assume the same security measures are taken, unless doing so would not be possible. You do not necessarily need to use a USB stick for one of your backups, but the medium of storage for at least one of your backups should be different than your other backups. Every medium of storage has the potential for data loss under certain circumstances, and the only way to mitigate this risk is to use multiple storage mediums. I would also point out that not all seeds are associated with cold storage. It is generally a good practice to use a seed for your hot wallet, and your hot wallet should also be backed up, including using multiple storage mediums.
I would also bring up that it is a best practice to store backups of your seed phrase in multiple mediums of storage. So if you do decide to store one copy that is written on paper, you should store another copy of your seed in some medium of storage, such as an encrypted USB stick or encrypted HDD. This way if your ink does fade, you will hopefully still have access to your other backups.
I have several USB devices that suddenly died on me, so I am not considering them a viable option for any important backup. They can also create errors with operating system if they are encrypted resulting in easy disc format and permanent data destruction. I wish there was some physical switch that disables writing like it was with old magnetic tapes long time ago. Yes, there is x problem with y medium of storage. That is why you use multiple mediums of storage so you can reduce the overall risk of losing your seed. |
|
|
|
Trump is not going to start a new war in response to a Russian invasion, although I do believe he would be open to continuing military operations in the region if he is convinced that is what is best for the US. Trump was harder on Russia than either Obama or Biden, despite the baseless claims of being a Russian agent. The "Russiagate" stuff is indeed largely conspiracy nonsense, but Trump is more transactional and self-interested than Biden, so I think he'd be willing to lift sanctions in a few years if he could negotiate a deal with Putin which looked like a win. I think most politicians, and especially Presidents are transactional, and that should be a good thing. The Saudi's (for example) are not going to convert to democracy, and there is no real reason why the US should lose its troops and treasure in order to force them into being one, but that does not mean the US should not get something from the Saudis if the deal is a net benefit to us. I really don't know what Russia or Putin potentially would have to offer Trump if he were president in 2025. Trump was tough on Putin during his first term and increased the sanctions against Russia during his term. Before covid, it looked like a second Trump term was going to be almost automatic, and if Putin had something to offer, he could have made a deal with Trump. The Trump presidency made the US a net oil/energy exporter, which would be the only potential leverage that Putin might have, however, Trump could easily implement policies that would make the US energy independent again. I would note that if the Nordstream 2 pipeline was operational today, it is likely that Europe, especially Germany, would be much more willing to look the other way than they are today (even though Germany is really not helping with the situation currently). It was Trump that forced these delays via sanctions, and Putin could have offered Trump something to allow for the Nordstream 2 to be built. Trump was never going to be in office forever, so it would have benefited Putin for the Nordstream 2 to be built today, and for Germany to be relying on it for energy for years. |
|
|
|
Russia may initially claim to be going into areas controlled by separatists under the pretext of "liberating" those areas, but there is always the potential that the Russian military will not stop at those areas. Any invasion is going to be accompanied by airstrikes (likely), so if Russia limits airstrikes to the areas controlled by separatists, the invasion is likely to be limited to that area.
Why would they bomb the territory they already control, makes no sense. There has been fighting going on at the border of the disputed territory between the Ukraine military and the separatist militia. Presumably, there is Ukrainian military equipment and personnel at the border of the area that separatists occupy. |
|
|
|
The problem is that Ukraine likely cannot win a war against Russia if Russia is willing to continue any war it is fighting. Ukraine can possibly make the war too bloody for Russia to continue, and eventually win when Russia withdraws. Even if Ukraine did win this way, they would still incur heavy losses themselves. So trying to avoid an invasion is in Ukraine's best interest.
Yeah, Ukraine can't win war against Russia. But now Russia is spreading agenda that Ukraine will attack Eastern region which is under control of separatists. How stupid it would be when there probably 170k or more Russian troops dislocated by the border. Avoiding invasion is best interest for Ukraine, but they don't have many tools in their hands when they have such neighbour. If Ukraine were to agree to give up parts of its country that are under the control of separatists, it would avoid bloodshed associated with war, and would not really change much in terms of Ukrraine. This would be an ideal outcome for Ukraine. So, Putin today officially recognised Luhansk and Donetsk People's Republics as independent stats. It's something unbeleavable how president of one country can simply decide that part of another country will be independent state.
With this action he probably will find reason to justify sending Russian troops to Donetsk and Luhansk to protect people from "regime" of Ukraine. And later simply accept these states into Russia like they did with Crimea.
In Putin speach there was lot of shit said, like threat from Ukraine to make nuclear weapon. I think this is a good indication that an invasion is imminent. Russia may initially claim to be going into areas controlled by separatists under the pretext of "liberating" those areas, but there is always the potential that the Russian military will not stop at those areas. Any invasion is going to be accompanied by airstrikes (likely), so if Russia limits airstrikes to the areas controlled by separatists, the invasion is likely to be limited to that area.
update: an invasion appears to have started |
|
|
|
I know that Canada has (tried) to sanction bitcoin addresses/wallets associated with people donating to the peaceful protestors, but I have serious doubts that Canada will be able to enforce any sanctions they levy. They simply don't have the moral authority to prevent the money from being spent. There is no serious evidence the money is being used for criminal activity.
the point of this court order is not that it proves any criminal act. its that its a court order to halt any movement of funds whilst the private individual that instigated the court order gathers statements and 'examinations under oath' from different groups to find evidence as to if the funds should be released or further extensions, or ordered to be handed to the courts. this court order is phase 1. we shall see how things develop on the 28th. if the private individual gets enough evidence from the statements/examinations to request funds be given to court, or if he extends to 'gather more evidence' (basically keep funds in limbo, or if he just lets the court order lapse at its expiry. if funds do move while court order is active. then the fundraising group can be fined or imprisoned. so its not a silly court order with no repercussions I don't think any country is going to comply with sanctions against people that are being investigated. That is not how Western jurisprudence works. |
|
|
|
I'm going to disagree with everyone above saying it doesn't really matter and instead say you should absolutely write your seed phrase by hand and not use a printer.*
Agreed. Printing a private key (or a seed phrase) increases the scope of possible ways that your key could be stolen.
I would also bring up that it is a best practice to store backups of your seed phrase in multiple mediums of storage. So if you do decide to store one copy that is written on paper, you should store another copy of your seed in some medium of storage, such as an encrypted USB stick or encrypted HDD. This way if your ink does fade, you will hopefully still have access to your other backups. |
|
|
|
The last part sounds bizaare. While they (court) appear ignorant how non-custodial wallet works, I still think they (nunchuck) should have responded in a more polite manner. I won't be surprised if they will be in some sort of trouble in the future because of that.
Responding in that way can result in the Judge looking unfavorably towards you and ruling against you in the future. Even if these rulings are overruled, this can be expensive. If they will never be subjected to the jurisdiction of the court, they don't have anything to worry about. Whoops, I just saw this, had posted something in Legal. This is almost as good as the US putting Bitcoin addresses on a sanctions list.
I am not aware of the US sanctioning any bitcoin addresses. Do you have a link to this happening? I know that Canada has (tried) to sanction bitcoin addresses/wallets associated with people donating to the peaceful protestors, but I have serious doubts that Canada will be able to enforce any sanctions they levy. They simply don't have the moral authority to prevent the money from being spent. There is no serious evidence the money is being used for criminal activity. |
|
|
|
What do you guys think about this idea for consolidating UTXOs while retaining privacy?
I think that some people used LN in similar way like this for improving privacy, but maybe you don't know that Chainalysis launched support for Lightning Network in December of last year. I don't know how exactly this tracking works and how effective it is, but I am sure governments are paying them a lot and they noticed LN can be used like this. https://blog.chainalysis.com/reports/lightning-network-support/In theory, you should be able to use LN for small amounts and not be tracked by Chainalysis (or similar). The term "small amounts" is in relation to your total channel sizes and the total capacity of the LN network. I am not sure how Chainalysis plans on monitoring LN transactions. However, I am willing to bet it has something to do with "pinging" various nodes to see if they can send a transaction of a certain size to a 3rd node. It may also involve sending small amounts to various nodes via various routes.
3) Submarine swap the whole amount out into a new on-chain address using the same service as in step 1.
This would be unnecessary. If all the transactions were sent to a single channel, you could simply close the channel. A concern of mine is that boltz.exchange would know about your transactions. It is possible Chainalysis could ask about a transaction and there is no guarantee they would not provide information. |
|
|
|
The Emergencies Act was set to take aim at protester finances. Speaking alongside Trudeau, Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland said banks can immediately freeze or suspend bank accounts tied to the truckers without a court order and without fear of civil liability.
Isn't that quite something -- Protestors peacefully displaying their frustration on government overreach through nonsensical and anti-scientific mandates, and the solution Trudeau comes up with is to delegate himself even more power by freezing bank accounts associated with legal protests. Keep in mind, I have yet to see any evidence that these funds are being associated with illegal activity. Canadian PM is preemptively withholding legally obtained funds for the sole reason he disagrees with the protestors. I think this is going to lead to the fall of the Castro Trudeau Canadian government. This is a response that dictators give to protests. Hopefully Canada's legal system is sufficiently strong such that banks that comply will be held liable if they freeze bank accounts, and this law will not be allowed to stand. I didn’t see anyone trying to block the funding of those BLM protests while they burned block the the wake of their “firey but mostly peaceful protest”...
But oh no no..
When the right protests.. Jan 6th, Charlottesville, these truckers, all of a sudden we are terrorists.. [/quote]BLM was quite literally terrorizing Americans in order to try to get their way. These truckers are peacefully protesting, making sound logical arguments, and are being labeled terrorists by the authoritarian left. |
|
|
|
I have sent 2 help emails to the admin to recover the account. But so far no response has been received. Should I wait longer?
I hope you mean that you are sending emails to the address listed in this thread. Emails sent to that address go to a vendor that helps with account recoveries. I believe they should at least respond to you, although I am unsure if they will actually be able to help you. In the meantime, I would suggest that you start using a new account. |
|
|
|
Further, you can trivially check if a particular PM, based on the PMID contains a specific content, and if so, you could chose to confirm as much.
LoyceV really shouldn't do that if he can't verify (as is the case with a BCC) that the person who's asking is a recipient and not merely fishing. Sequential message ID is not a substitute for authorization. Someone who is BCC'ed on a PM will have the exact content of the PM, word for word. If someone is able to produce an exact replica of a PM, I think it is fair to say they have access to the PM. It is not trivial to know the PMID of a message, along with the exact send date and all the receipants. This is distinct from someone providing general content of a message. |
|
|
|
Germany is handling the situation very wisely. It should further deescalate the situation. We don't need a war in Europe.
Russia is the aggressor in this conflict. Anything the west does is in response to what Russia does. The west is trying to make it difficult for Russia to continue its aggression, and Germany is making that more difficult. |
|
|
|
The Ukraine president has called for a meeting with Putin, so the two sides can come to a peaceful "settlement". It is possible that Ukraine will be willing to give up some of its territory in exchange for the promise of peace. This could be seen as a win at home for Putin (which is likely the root cause for the Russian aggression), and would avoid the bloodshed associated with war.
Do you mean that they would give up offcially Luhansk and Donbass which is under control of separatists? Or you mean giving up piece of Eastern Ukraine which is under of control of Kyiv? I think that none of these scenarios is possible. When it comes to Russia, promise of peace means nothing and it don't gives any guarantees that they won't come here again. I have no idea what Zelenski would be willing to offer. I agree that the Russians generally cannot be trusted when it comes to guarantees of peace. The problem is that Ukraine likely cannot win a war against Russia if Russia is willing to continue any war it is fighting. Ukraine can possibly make the war too bloody for Russia to continue, and eventually win when Russia withdraws. Even if Ukraine did win this way, they would still incur heavy losses themselves. So trying to avoid an invasion is in Ukraine's best interest. |
|
|
|
Anyone who was BCC'ed would not have the ability to have the PM published (assuming they are not also a CC or listed in the "to" field) I don't want to add to the existing possibilities of misleading people. That's why I didn't use "LoyceBot" but created "LoyceV's PM publisher", and that's why I don't want to risk BCC-receivers to become a scam victim when they think they can use my bot as evidence. I thought of adding another decimal to the delay, but if it's 30 years a scam victim might want me to publish it earlier. Well to be clear, any global mod can publish, or more specifically confirm the contents of a PM that is reported to them. So if you have a case in which someone is "BCC'ed". Further, you can trivially check if a particular PM, based on the PMID contains a specific content, and if so, you could chose to confirm as much. |
|
|
|
NATO countries/the West made it clear they don't have a vested interest in Ukraine. By virtue of that fact alone, it is not their war to fight. All the talk about a "swift" response from the U.S. is just that, talk. It's rather unfortunate for the Ukrainian people that they are being left to the wolves, but their sovereignty is their own business.
Access to the black sea is important to western interests. Ignoring the above, western Ukraine borders NATO countries. If Russia were to invade Ukraine, there would be military action on NATO's doorstep, and there would be fear that Russia is not going to stop with invading Ukraine. If an invasion of Ukraine is seen as legitimate, there would be a legitimate reason for Russian military activity on the border of NATO countries.
Germany is soft on Russia because it is dependent on Russian energy. Plain and simple. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
