@@ -32,7 +32,7 @@ popular Bitcoin infrastructure software.
3232 by the authors, adding support for CISA to Bitcoin would require a
3333 consensus change and possible interactions between signature
3434 aggregation and other proposed consensus changes that may warrant further
35- study.
35+ study. {% assign timestamp="0:50" %}
3636
3737- ** Standardized backup for wallet descriptors:** Salvatore Ingala
3838 [ posted] [ ingala backdes ] to Delving Bitcoin a summary of various
@@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ popular Bitcoin infrastructure software.
4949 anyone to store many encrypted copies of a descriptor across multiple
5050 media and network locations, and then use their [ BIP32 wallet
5151 seed] [ topic bip32 ] to generate their xpub, which they can use to
52- decrypt the descriptor if they ever lose their wallet data.
52+ decrypt the descriptor if they ever lose their wallet data. {% assign timestamp="21:34" %}
5353
5454## Selected Q&A from Bitcoin Stack Exchange
5555
@@ -65,46 +65,46 @@ answers posted since our last update.*
6565- [ Practicality of half-aggregated schnorr signatures?] ( {{bse}}125982 )
6666 Fjahr discusses why independent, unaggregated signatures are not required in order to
6767 validate a half-aggregated signature in [ cross-input signature aggregation
68- (CISA)] [ topic cisa ] and why unaggregated signatures can actually be problematic.
68+ (CISA)] [ topic cisa ] and why unaggregated signatures can actually be problematic. {% assign timestamp="17:16" %}
6969
7070- [ What's the largest size OP_RETURN payload ever created?] ( {{bse}}126131 )
7171 Vojtěch Strnad [ links] [ op_return tx ] to a Runes [ meta-protocol] [ topic
7272 client-side validation] transaction with 79,870 bytes as the largest
73- ` OP_RETURN ` .
73+ ` OP_RETURN ` . {% assign timestamp="41:17" %}
7474
7575- [ Non-LN explanation of pay-to-anchor?] ( {{bse}}126098 )
7676 Murch details the rationale and structure of [ pay-to-anchor (P2A)] [ topic
77- ephemeral anchors] output scripts.
77+ ephemeral anchors] output scripts. {% assign timestamp="43:29" %}
7878
7979- [ Up-to-date statistics about chain reorganizations?] ( {{bse}}126019 )
8080 0xb10c and Murch point to sources of reorg data, including the
8181 [ stale-blocks] [ stale-blocks github ] repository, the [ forkmonitor.info] [ ] website,
82- and the [ fork.observer] [ ] website.
82+ and the [ fork.observer] [ ] website. {% assign timestamp="48:08" %}
8383
8484- [ Are Lightning channels always P2WSH?] ( {{bse}}125967 )
8585 Polespinasa notes the ongoing development of P2TR [ simple taproot channels] [ topic
86- simple taproot channels] and summarizes current support across Lightning implementations.
86+ simple taproot channels] and summarizes current support across Lightning implementations. {% assign timestamp="52:33" %}
8787
8888- [ Child-pays-for-parent as a defense against a double spend?] ( {{bse}}126056 )
8989 Murch lists complications with using a high fee [ CPFP] [ topic cpfp ] child
9090 transaction to incentivize a blockchain reorg in defense of an
91- already-confirmed double-spent output.
91+ already-confirmed double-spent output. {% assign timestamp="53:40" %}
9292
9393- [ What values does CHECKTEMPLATEVERIFY hash?] ( {{bse}}126133 )
9494 Average-gray outlines the fields that [ OP_CHECKTEMPLATEVERIFY] [ topic
9595 op_checktemplateverify] commits to: nVersion, nLockTime, input count,
9696 sequences hash, output count, outputs hash, input index, and in some cases the
97- scriptSig hash.
97+ scriptSig hash. {% assign timestamp="59:06" %}
9898
9999- [ Why can't Lightning nodes opt to reveal channel balances for better routing efficiency?] ( {{bse}}125985 )
100100 Rene Pickhardt explains concerns about the staleness and trustworthiness of
101- the data, privacy implications, and points to a [ similar proposal] [ BOLTs #780 ] from 2020.
101+ the data, privacy implications, and points to a [ similar proposal] [ BOLTs #780 ] from 2020. {% assign timestamp="59:32" %}
102102
103103- [ Does post-quantum require hard fork or soft fork?] ( {{bse}}126122 )
104104 Vojtěch Strnad outlines an approach of how a [ post-quantum] [ topic quantum
105105 resistance] (PQC) signature scheme could be [ soft-fork activated] [ topic soft
106106 fork activation] as well as how a hard or soft fork could lock
107- quantum-vulnerable coins.
107+ quantum-vulnerable coins. {% assign timestamp="1:02:27" %}
108108
109109## Releases and release candidates
110110
@@ -114,7 +114,7 @@ release candidates._
114114
115115- [ LND 0.19.0-beta.rc3] [ ] is a release candidate for this popular LN
116116 node. One of the major improvements that could probably use testing
117- is the new RBF-based fee bumping for cooperative closes.
117+ is the new RBF-based fee bumping for cooperative closes. {% assign timestamp="1:07:39" %}
118118
119119## Notable code and documentation changes
120120
@@ -133,12 +133,12 @@ repo], and [BINANAs][binana repo]._
133133 side, this consists of a field listing the participant pubkeys, plus a
134134 separate public nonce field and a separate partial signature field for each
135135 signer. On the output side, it is a single field listing the participant
136- pubkeys for the new UTXO.
136+ pubkeys for the new UTXO. {% assign timestamp="1:07:58" %}
137137
138138- [ LDK #3601 ] [ ] adds a new ` LocalHTLCFailureReason ` enum to represent each
139139 standard [ BOLT4] [ ] error code, along with some variants that surface
140140 additional information to the user that was previously removed for privacy
141- reasons.
141+ reasons. {% assign timestamp="1:10:14" %}
142142
143143{% include snippets/recap-ad.md when="2025-04-29 15:30" %}
144144{% include references.md %}
0 commit comments