PR and QC1

Author: claylock-oreilly

appb_errata.adoc

@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ witnessed, but proof that it came from the largest pool of CPU power."
 ____
 
 * *Implementation detail:* If each link in the chain (called "blocks"
-in Bitcoin) was built using the same amount of proof of work (PoW), the
+in Bitcoin) was built using the same amount of _proof of work_ (PoW), the
 longest chain would be the one backed by the largest pool of
 computational power. However, Bitcoin was implemented in such a way that
 the amount of PoW can vary between blocks, so it became important not to
@@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ occurred in July 2010, long after Bitcoin’s initial release:
 +    if (pindexNew->bnChainWork > bnBestChainWork)
 ----
 * *Terminology change:* General CPUs were used to generate the POW for
-the earliest Bitcoin blocks but POW generation today is mostly performed
+the earliest Bitcoin blocks, but POW generation today is mostly performed
 by specialist Application Specific Integrated Circuits (ASICs), so
 instead of saying "CPU power" it is perhaps more correct to say
 "computational power" or, simply, "hash rate" for the hashing used
@@ -56,7 +56,7 @@ called "miners" based on Nakamoto’s analogy to gold miners in section
 6 of the paper. Nakamoto expected all miners to be nodes but the
 software he released did not require all nodes to be miners. In the
 original software, a simple menu item in the node GUI allowed toggling
-the mining function or or off.
+the mining function on or off.
 +
 Today it is the case that the overwhelming number of nodes are not
 miners and that many individuals who own mining hardware do not use it
@@ -77,7 +77,7 @@ known as the _selfish mining attack_ to allow an attacker with around
 30% of total network hash rate to make other miners less profitable,
 perhaps driving them into following the attacking miner’s policy. So
 instead of saying "a majority of CPU power is controlled by nodes that
-are not cooperating to attack the network" it is perhaps more correct
+are not cooperating to attack the network," it is perhaps more correct
 to say "as long as nodes cooperating to attack the network control less
 than about 30% of the network."
 
@@ -94,11 +94,11 @@ ____
 this system where digital signatures are not used directly but rather a
 "deterministic expression" is used instead. Just as a signature that
 matches a known public key can be used to enable a payment, the data
-that satisfies an known expression can also enable a payment.
+that satisfies a known expression can also enable a payment.
 Generically, the expression that must be satisfied in Bitcoin in order
 to spend a coin is known as an "encumbrance." Almost all encumbrances
 in Bitcoin to date require providing at least one signature. So instead
-of saying "a chain of digital signatures" it is more correct to say
+of saying "a chain of digital signatures," it is more correct to say
 "a chain of encumbrances." Given that transactions often have more
 than one input and more than one output, the structure is not very
 chain-like; it’s more accurately described as a directed acyclic ((("transactions", "errata in Bitcoin whitepaper", startref="transaction-errata")))graph
@@ -185,7 +185,7 @@ the past.
 
 ____
 "Some linking((("privacy", "errata in Bitcoin whitepaper"))) is still unavoidable with multi-input transactions, which
-necessarily reveal that their inputs were owned by the same owner"
+necessarily reveal that their inputs were owned by the same owner."
 ____
 
 * *Post-publication invention:* It isn't clear that different inputs
@@ -197,7 +197,7 @@ toward paying Charlie and Dan than there is between just Alice
 contributing two of her inputs toward paying Charlie and Dan.
 +
 This technique is known today as
-https://oreil.ly/UBEJX[CoinJoin] and software implementing
+https://oreil.ly/UBEJX[CoinJoin], and software implementing
 it has been in use since 2015.
 
 === Calculations

appc_bips.adoc

@@ -7,8 +7,8 @@ Bitcoin Improvement Proposals are design documents providing information to the
 As per BIP1 _BIP Purpose and Guidelines_, there are three((("Bitcoin Improvement Proposals (BIPs)", "types of"))) kinds of BIPs:
 
 _Standard_ BIP:: Describes any change that affects most or all Bitcoin implementations, such as a change to the network protocol, a change in block or transaction validity rules, or any change or addition that affects the interoperability of applications using Bitcoin.
-_Informational_ BIP:: Describes a Bitcoin design issue, or provides general guidelines or information to the Bitcoin community, but does not propose a new feature. Informational BIPs do not necessarily represent a Bitcoin community consensus or recommendation, so users and implementors may ignore informational BIPs or follow their advice.
-_Process_ BIP:: Describes a Bitcoin process, or proposes a change to (or an event in) a process. Process BIPs are like standard BIPs but apply to areas other than the Bitcoin protocol itself. They might propose an implementation, but not to Bitcoin's codebase; they often require community consensus; and unlike informational BIPs, they are more than recommendations, and users are typically not free to ignore them. Examples include procedures, guidelines, changes to the decision-making process, and changes to the tools or environment used in Bitcoin development. Any meta-BIP is also considered a process BIP.
+_Informational_ BIP:: Describes a Bitcoin design issue or provides general guidelines or information to the Bitcoin community, but does not propose a new feature. Informational BIPs do not necessarily represent a Bitcoin community consensus or recommendation, so users and implementors may ignore informational BIPs or follow their advice.
+_Process_ BIP:: Describes a Bitcoin process or proposes a change to (or an event in) a process. Process BIPs are like standard BIPs but apply to areas other than the Bitcoin protocol itself. They might propose an implementation but not to Bitcoin's codebase; they often require community consensus. Unlike informational BIPs, they are more than recommendations, and users are typically not free to ignore them. Examples include procedures, guidelines, changes to the decision-making process, and changes to the tools or environment used in Bitcoin development. Any meta-BIP is also considered a process BIP.
 
 BIPs are recorded in a https://oreil.ly/jjO0R[versioned repository on GitHub].
 An MIT-licensed document from the open source Bitcoin Core project,
@@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ significantly changed.
 
 BIPs that are ((("Bitcoin Improvement Proposals (BIPs)", "implemented by Bitcoin Core", id="bips-implement")))((("Bitcoin Core", "BIPs implemented by", id="bitcoin-core-bips")))implemented by Bitcoin Core:
 
--    BIP9: The changes allowing multiple soft-forks to be deployed in parallel have been implemented since v0.12.1 (PR #7575)
+-    BIP9: The changes allowing multiple soft-forks to be deployed in parallel have been implemented since v0.12.1 (PR #7575).
 -    BIP11: Multisig outputs are standard since v0.6.0 (PR #669).
 -    BIP13: The address format for P2SH addresses has been implemented since v0.6.0 (PR #669).
 -    BIP14: The subversion string is being used as User Agent since v0.6.0 (PR #669).
@@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ BIPs that are ((("Bitcoin Improvement Proposals (BIPs)", "implemented by Bitcoin
 -    BIP84: The experimental descriptor wallets introduced in v0.21.0 by default use the Hierarchical Deterministic Wallet derivation proposed by BIP84. (PR #16528)
 -    BIP86: Descriptor wallets by default use the Hierarchical Deterministic Wallet derivation proposed by BIP86 since v23.0 (PR #22364).
 -    BIP90: Trigger mechanism for activation of BIPs 34, 65, and 66 has been simplified to block height checks since v0.14.0 (PR #8391).
--    BIP111: NODE_BLOOM service bit added, and enforced for all peer versions as of v0.13.0 (PR #6579 and PR #6641).
+-    BIP111: NODE_BLOOM service bit added and enforced for all peer versions as of v0.13.0 (PR #6579 and PR #6641).
 -    BIP112: The CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY opcode has been implemented since v0.12.1 (PR #7524), and has been buried since v0.19.0 (PR #16060).
 -    BIP113: Median time past lock-time calculations have been implemented since v0.12.1 (PR #6566), and has been buried since v0.19.0 (PR #16060).
 -    BIP125: Opt-in full replace-by-fee signaling partially implemented. See doc/policy/mempool-replacements.md.

author_bio.html

@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ <h1>About the Authors</h1>
 
 <p>Andreas grew up with the internet, starting his first company, an early BBS and proto-ISP, as a teenager in his home in Greece. He earned degrees in computer science, data communications, and distributed systems from University College London (UCL)—recently ranked among the world’s top 10 universities. After moving to the United States, Andreas cofounded and managed a successful technology research company, and in that role advised dozens of Fortune 500 company executives on networking, security, data centers, and cloud computing. More than 200 of his articles on security, cloud computing, and data centers have been published in print and syndicated worldwide. He holds two patents in networking and security.</p>
 
-<p>In 1990, Andreas started teaching various IT topics in private, professional, and academic environments. He honed his speaking skills in front of audiences ranging in size from five executives in a boardroom to thousands of people in large conferences. With more than 400 speaking engagements under his belt he is considered a world-class and charismatic public speaker and teacher. In 2014, he was appointed as a teaching fellow with the University of Nicosia, the first university in the world to offer a masters degree in digital currency. In this role, he helped develop the curriculum and cotaught the Introduction to Digital Currencies course, offered as a massive open online course (MOOC) through the university.</p>
+<p>In 1990, Andreas started teaching various IT topics in private, professional, and academic environments. He honed his speaking skills in front of audiences ranging in size from five executives in a boardroom to thousands of people in large conferences. With more than 400 speaking engagements under his belt, he is considered a world-class and charismatic public speaker and teacher. In 2014, he was appointed as a teaching fellow with the University of Nicosia, the first university in the world to offer a masters degree in digital currency. In this role, he helped develop the curriculum and cotaught the Introduction to Digital Currencies course, offered as a massive open online course (MOOC) through the university.</p>
 
 <p>As a bitcoin entrepreneur, Andreas has founded a number of bitcoin businesses and launched several community open source projects. He serves as an advisor to several bitcoin and cryptocurrency companies. He is a widely published author of articles and blog posts on bitcoin, a permanent host on the popular Let’s Talk Bitcoin podcast, and a frequent speaker at technology and security conferences worldwide.</p>