💬 luke-jr commented on pull request "Silent Payments: send and receive":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27827#issuecomment-1654676047)
>Can you explain your reasoning for wanting to split it up? I'd prefer to keep them together only because I see no reason to merge sending without receiving support in Bitcoin Core.

1. The sooner sending is supported everywhere, the sooner it is *practical* for people to use it for receiving. Might as well get that ball rolling ASAP.
2. Sending support means the BIP isn't going to change under me (and break compatibility / risk coin loss) if I merge things in Knots first.
3. Core refuses t
...

🤔 jonatack reviewed a pull request: "docs: Rewrite README to make it more appealing"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28174#pullrequestreview-1550942991)
A few more suggestions.

Just one opinion: in dark mode, which I use exclusively, I find the emojis are large and highly distracting from the text. If others agree, maybe remove them or make them smaller.

💬 jonatack commented on pull request "docs: Rewrite README to make it more appealing":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28174#discussion_r1276887186)
```suggestion
We use the https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui repository solely for GUI development. Its master branch serves as a clone in all monotree repositories. It doesn't have release branches and tags, so it's only useful to fork it for development purposes.
```
or just s/tags there,/tags,/

💬 jonatack commented on pull request "docs: Rewrite README to make it more appealing":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28174#discussion_r1276886210)
```suggestion
Curious to know more? Find further details in [doc folder](/doc).
```

💬 jonatack commented on pull request "docs: Rewrite README to make it more appealing":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28174#discussion_r1276888844)
Suggest dropping either "Important:" or "Please note," -- both seem to be too much.

💬 luke-jr commented on pull request "[WIP] add a stratum v2 template provider":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27854#discussion_r1276896030)
We don't typically refer to "Bitcoind" like this

💬 luke-jr commented on pull request "[WIP] add a stratum v2 template provider":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27854#discussion_r1276895712)
Probably should be called `-stratumv2port`, unless it supports specifying an IP to bind to (probably a good idea)

💬 luke-jr commented on pull request "[WIP] add a stratum v2 template provider":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27854#discussion_r1276896582)
Should be added to the port number check earlier

💬 luke-jr commented on pull request "[WIP] add a stratum v2 template provider":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27854#discussion_r1276897878)
Code readability is more important than "less code"...

💬 luke-jr commented on pull request "[WIP] add a stratum v2 template provider":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/27854#discussion_r1276896935)
Rather than prefixing with "sv2:", suggest a new log category.

💬 luke-jr commented on pull request "init: changing -torcontrol help to specify that a default port is used":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28101#discussion_r1276902524)
>I used chatgpt to refine the sentence a bit more to this

Please redo this without ChatGPT involved. LLMs do not have a clear copyright status.

📝 luke-jr opened a pull request: "CONTRIBUTING: Caution against using AI/LLMs (ChatGPT, Copilot, etc)"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28175)
There's been at least a few instances where someone tried to contribute LLM-generated content, but such content has a dubious copyright status.

Our contributing policy already implicitly rules out such contributions, but being more explicit here might help.

💬 jonatack commented on pull request "CONTRIBUTING: Caution against using AI/LLMs (ChatGPT, Copilot, etc)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28175#issuecomment-1654713459)
Concept ACK, makes sense, though IANAL.

💬 Crypt-iQ commented on pull request "test: Avoid intermittent issues due to async events in validationinterface_tests":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28150#issuecomment-1654856825)
> Interestingly, I can _not_ reproduce this easily with `rr`. I tried:
>
> ```
> while rr record --chaos ./src/test/test_bitcoin -t validationinterface_tests/unregister_all_during_call ; do true ; done
> ```

I was able to reproduce by adding -printtoconsole=1

💬 russeree commented on pull request "CONTRIBUTING: Caution against using AI/LLMs (ChatGPT, Copilot, etc)":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28175#issuecomment-1654866248)
Concept ACK.

The two thoughts that come to mind are that

1. This section could become a cat and mouse game between the various models. ```but not limited to, ChatGPT, GitHub Copilot, and Meta LLaMA``` which ones of these will still have relevance in the future.

2. LLMs right now are the benchmark for text to text models but there are other types of models as well example NLP and RNN models. So this language could become obsolete overtime.

This post was written by GPT4 ... Just K
...

💬 jonatack commented on pull request " test: Extend stale_tip_peer_management test ":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/23352#issuecomment-1654878558)
> > I wonder if it's possible (and worth it) to tweak the test such that it would have caught #26172.
>
> I have a [test](https://github.com/LarryRuane/bitcoin/commit/3f847e4c4e5f89f812407eef39d421f45b0eea02) for that but haven't made the PR yet (I'll do that this week). I'll compare what I have to this PR since there's likely some overlap.

@LarryRuane any update on the test?

💬 russeree commented on pull request "docs: Rewrite README to make it more appealing":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28174#issuecomment-1654878736)
My technical objection is that emoji illustrations vary between browsers, devices, and browser versions. The use of emojis would create an inconsistent experience between platforms.

My emotional and personal objection is and I mean this in the nicest way possible. I don't like the 'vibe' the changes to more informal language creates. It also makes the document less concise.

- The phrase ```Curious to know more? Find further details``` feels like a pitch almost as compared to the current `
...

💬 jonatack commented on pull request "net: Use serialization parameters for CAddress serialization":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/25284#issuecomment-1654879568)
Concept ACK, will have a look.

💬 ariard commented on pull request "docs: Rewrite README to make it more appealing":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28174#issuecomment-1654897482)
I’m not sure keeping the project documentation as easy-to-read and engaging with emojis is that much a goal in itself considering Bitcoin Core is a security-first project underpinning a $567 billions ecosystem, where contributors would be rather invited to run their workflow on attack-surface minimized workstation. Rich graphical rendering requires lengthier and more opaque software supply chain.

Not a strong opinion, though there has been a [talk at DEFCON 30](https://media.defcon.org/DEF%20
...

💬 kevkevinpal commented on pull request "init: changing -torcontrol help to specify that a default port is used":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28101#discussion_r1277044095)
Valid point will change to the following

`"Tor control host and port to use if onion listening enabled (default: %s). If no port is specified, the default port will be used (default: %s)."`