pull down to refresh
Here was my first answer, which I now withdraw:
Pick something on purpose, focus on it, and have a tangible output in a finite time.
Here is my official answer:
Talk to lots of different kinds of people from every place and all walks of life, and think about what they say.
I do not see any risk of having 20M sats in a LN channel vs a cold wallet.
The only risk is to get a force close, but that doesn't mean you will lose your sats. Not at all! You will only pay some extra fees, that's all.
It's all about perspective: what do you want to do with those sats.
If you plan to use use them, buying stuff, then the right choice is to have them ready in some LN channels.
If you do not plan to spend them soon, then yes, keep them in a cold wallet.
But keep ALL your sats in cold wallet and not being prepared to spend I think is silly. ofc you do not have to put all your sats in LN channels, but a portion of max 10% I think is reasonable. It's all about how many sats you expect to spend in the near future.
SPLITTING YOUR STASH IN 3 LEVELS IS VERY IMPORTANT!
https://i.postimg.cc/MTL2kvT0/3level-stash.jpg
This isn't discussed much that I've ever seen.
The devs are not normally considered a risk because people in the btc community over-index on the technical structures in the ecosystem, and under-index on the social structures. What gets merged in the code is the result of human judgment, and judgment is a social product. The opinions we all have are the result of social processes.
The mantra of DYOR ignores the fact that the R comes from someplace -- it comes from the ideas that are laying around. So which ideas are lying around? In many cases they come from idea intermediaries, since people are famously reluctant to think for themselves.
I think this means that, while exerting significant influence over core development is a kind of quasi-centralization risk, the nature of the 'risk' is worth thinking about. Specifically, it's hard to decouple 'risk' from 'influence' and as social primates, we will never be free from influence.
They presented at btc++ and mentioned that they have a really interesting node architecture that basically spends up nodes on demand. Different components of the node live on distributed tech. It really starts to not be a "node" any more than a publicly facing endpoint with distributed and redundant microservice infrastructure backing it like most modern tech is.
Glad you read and enjoyed it, though I do think nothing replaces the original text. For starters, not getting the insight into the internal thoughts of the characters allows a lot more room for interpretation. It especially allows more interpretation over why MacBeth gave in and how much he resisted.
While there are people who revel at being evil (when you get to Titus Andronicus, you'll meet Aaron, and in Othello there's Iago), flawed heroes (and MacBeth certainly starts the play as one) tend to be more compelling, personally. Even Hamlet's Claudius, one of his more evil villains is shown to be capable of guilt.
As for MacDuff, it's because he really didn't think MacBeth was evil. Usurping the throne is one thing, killing rivals is another, but going after the family was considered out of bounds.
And yeah, the Witches are such an enigma. Were they simply revealing what was destined? If he'd never encountered them, would he have been tempted? Was their second prophecy meant to make him complacent?
Shakespeare doesn't always use the supernatural; it's just a useful tool depending on the story he wants to tell.
If you're a fan of fantasy, though, I do recommend Terry Pratchett's Wyrd Sisters, which starts with a comparable group of witches and a royal plot, but goes in very different directions.