News61: edits

_includes/specials/bech32/24-conclusion.md

@@ -6,9 +6,9 @@ wallets to switch from using P2SH-wrapped segwit addresses by default to
 more efficient native segwit bech32 addresses.
 
 By our efforts and by the efforts of many other Bitcoiners, we think
-we're on the brink of success: 82% <!-- 19/23 --> of the 23 popular
+we're on the brink of success: 19 of the 23 popular
 wallets and services we've [evaluated][bech32 compat] are ready to pay
-bech32 addresses (up 8% from last week) and 17% <!-- 4/23 --> already
+bech32 addresses and 4 already
 generate bech32 receiving addresses by default.
 
 Every week, it's looking more and more reasonable for wallets to switch

_posts/en/newsletters/2019-08-28-newsletter.md

@@ -95,14 +95,13 @@ you pay to access all of segwit's benefits.*
 *[Bitcoin StackExchange][bitcoin.se] is one of the first places Optech
 contributors look for answers to their questions---or when we have a
 few spare moments of time to help curious or confused users.  In
-this monthly feature, we highlight some of the top voted questions and
+this monthly feature, we highlight some of the top-voted questions and
 answers made since our last update.*
 
 {% comment %}<!-- https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/search?tab=votes&q=created%3a1m..%20is%3aanswer -->{%
 endcomment %}
 {% assign bse = "https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/a/" %}
 
-
 - [What are the key differences between regtest and the proposed
   signet?]({{bse}}89640) Pieter Wuille and Andrew Chow explain that while
   regtest is good for local automated integration tests, signet is more akin to
@@ -115,22 +114,23 @@ endcomment %}
   control?]({{bse}}89508) Andrew Chow explains that since a hardware wallet is
   not a full node, it needs to get its transaction amount information elsewhere.
   In the case of non-segwit inputs, often the amount is provided to the hardware
-  signing device by the host computer or wallet including the previous
+  signing device via the host computer or other wallet by sending the previous
   transaction to the device. In the case of segwit inputs, the amount for the
-  input being signed is actually part of the data that is being signed.
+  input being signed must always be provided because it is a required part of
+  the data that is signed and verified.
 
 - [How does one prove that they sent bitcoins to an unspendable
-  wallet?]({{bse}}89554) JBaczuk explains three ways to prove coins are
-  unspendable. These include: sending the coins to an OP_RETURN output, sending
-  coins to a script which returns false, or sending coins to an address derived
-  from a contrived, non-random script hash.
+  wallet?]({{bse}}89554) JBaczuk explains that you can prove coins
+  unspendable by sending the coins to an OP_RETURN output
+  or another script that always returns false, or by sending coins to an
+  address derived from a contrived, non-random script hash.
 
 - [Why is proof-of-work required in Bitcoin?]({{bse}}89972) Pieter Wuille
   explains that PoW does not create trust, but instead creates incentive for
   miners to cooperate with other miners by building on their blocks. PoW is also
   used to regulate block times (and thus protect against denial of service)
   since the difficulty adjustment makes it expensive to reliably produce blocks
-  more often than, on average, every 10 minutes.
+  more often than every 10 minutes on average.
 
 ## Notable code and documentation changes