--- a/handouts/ho07.tex	Fri Jun 01 15:46:34 2018 +0100
+++ b/handouts/ho07.tex	Sat Jun 09 21:01:46 2018 +0100
@@ -177,7 +177,7 @@
 Did Alice intend to send him 10 Bitcoins, or did the message
 get duplicated by for example an attacker re-playing a sniffed
 message? What is needed is a kind of serial number for such
-transactions. This means transaction messages shoul look more like 
+transactions. This means transaction messages should look more like 
 
 \begin{center}
 $\{\text{I, Alice, am giving Bob Bitcoin \#1234567.}\}_{K^{priv}_{Alice}}$
@@ -277,7 +277,7 @@
 transactions, but also to split outgoing transactions to
 potentially more than one receiver. The latter is also needed.
 Consider again the rightmost transactions in
-Figure~\ref{txngraph} and suppose Alice is a coffeeshop owner
+Figure~\ref{txngraph} and suppose Alice is a coffee shop owner
 selling coffees for 1 Bitcoin. Charles received a transaction
 from Zack over 5 Bitcoins, say. How does Charles pay for the
 coffee? There is no explicit notion of \emph{change} in the
@@ -622,7 +622,7 @@
 
 \subsubsection*{Bitcoins for Real}
 
-Let us now turn to the nitty gritty details. As a participant
+Let us now turn to the nitty-gritty details. As a participant
 in the Bitcoin network you need to generate and store a
 public-private key pair. The public key you need to advertise
 in order to receive payments (transactions). The private key
@@ -642,7 +642,7 @@
 forever) I would opt for the third option for anything except
 for trivial amounts of Bitcoins. As we have seen earlier in
 the course, securing a computer system that it can withstand a
-targeted breakin is still very much an unsolved problem.
+targeted break-in is still very much an unsolved problem.
 
 An interesting fact with Bitcoin keys is that there is no
 check for duplicate addresses. This means when generating a
@@ -753,7 +753,7 @@
 to pay with Bitcoins? Paying with paper money used to be a
 quite anonymous act (unlike paying with credit cards, for
 example). But this has changed nowadays: You cannot come to a
-bank anymore with a suitcase full of money and try to open a
+bank any longer with a suitcase full of money and try to open a
 bank account. Strict money laundering and taxation laws mean
 that not even Swiss banks are prepared to take such money and
 open a bank account. That is why Bitcoins are touted as 
@@ -830,7 +830,7 @@
   located somewhere in the vicinity of the government's reach).  This
   would impinge on what is called \emph{fungibility} of Bitcoins and
   make them much less attractive to baddies. Suddenly their
-  ``hard-earned'' Bitcoin money cannot be spent anymore. The attraction
+  ``hard-earned'' Bitcoin money cannot be spent any more. The attraction
   of this option is that this blacklisting can be easily done
   ``whole-sale'' and therefore be really be an attractive target for
   governments \& Co.