Native segwit (bech32) (p2wpkh) (BIP84) wallets are the default in Joinmarket, as of just now, i.e. it is in master branch. Release soon.

This means that if you start the software today you will create those wallets and use the joinmarket bot pit for those wallets and create coinjoins with them, by default; you can set `native=false` in the config if you want, however. See docs/ directory for details.

Please publicize this where you can for users' plausible deniability when starting new bots.

· · Web · 1 · 8 · 11

Come to think of it, a little more context might be helpful:

We have had bech32 wallets for quite a while, i guess a year and a half or so, but not much use for them per se, considering coinjoins were all p2sh; but now we think users will want to switch to the native format, since it's obviously a bit cheaper. E.g. @openoms did a survey of users here or there, found a large majority in support of making the switch now....

Important to understand that old pit with p2sh coinjoins will continue for anyone who wants to use them, we just expect a transition will occur over the next few months.

Another reason bech32 wallets are nice is for payjoin interoperability with wallets like btcpayserver and wasabi. and another is that a lot of wallets have switched to this address type as default in recent year or two (e.g. Electrum).

@sjors oh just minor, i mean that *non-coinjoin* payments from joinmarket wallets will look a lot like those from other wallets (we have locktime, version fingerprint now closely matching core and electrum too btw). Also payjoins as a subset of that.

Coinjoins per se, not the case of course, except in very unlikely edge cases.

@waxwing right, so the plausible deniabiity is for users, to blend in, not some strange game theory for why node operators need to see this announcement before upgrading 🙂

Which is what you said, but I didn't read it right.


oh sorry i forgot what i wrote before 🤦‍♂️

yes plausible deniability is for users who switch to new joinmarket "trading pit", the first say 3 makers do not want to be publically known as obviously, say, the developers. if we don't tell people that the software on master branch is updated to this, the likelihood that the first 2 or 3 makers are those people is uncomfortably high.

@waxwing (hint: you can tag by just adding the # before the word as you use it in your post :D like that it only takes one character)

Sign in to participate in the conversation
unidentified instance

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!