Thread

Replies (106)

Keep misguiding your followers coward...!!! Your reputation damage will be so hard that I doubt if you will ever recover from it once spam war settles down and shitcoin core gets completely obliterated. It will also likely affect Ten31, Opensats and Nostr. You being CERTIFIED CORECUCK was not on my bingo card for this year. image
↩ replying to Kevin's Bacon
I'd like to see more "don't trust - verify" on both sides. That's basically the same as "bring receipts." An passionate argument with no receipts is worthless, and conflating name calling with an argument is actually detrimental to the side people think they're on. Tbh I'm sick of seeing this. Wherever you see some doing this, even if they're on the same "side," fucking shut them down. Win by being right, not by bullying, and don't tolerate that crap.
↩ replying to npub12kqf...jh7s
I don’t agree with that framing, filtering out a certain class of txns (spam) isn’t censorship. Censorship is filtering out individual txns based on individual characteristics. Filters have been around forever, they’ve been working just fine. The busy body dumbfucks at core should have left things alone. If they wanted to tinker with fun little open source projects they should have found something else and left my money alone.
↩ replying to Praveen Perera
Filtering out a certain class of transactions isn't censorship (agreed), but it does resemble ad blocker behavior which is a form of centralization. In ad blockers, they all query a centralized list, or have trended to do so. Gov can put pressure on anything that is centralized. Yes filters work. That's the problem and solution unfortunately. Hence tradeoff between censorship resistance and decentralization.
↩ replying to npub185h9...wrdp
Not sure most people are aware of the benefits (I'm not). My understanding is that the commitment transaction is basically the transactions you are "passing around" with the other side of a lightning channel, your updates to the "bar tab". There is an issue that if these are too old, when you try to force close a channel, it fails because the fee to the miner is too low, so we need a mechanism for either side to bump the fee. If this is correct, can you complete it with why is it important to support zero fee commitments and what exactly do they solve? (Or share a link πŸ™‚)
The source of corruption and compromise of the Core devs. image View quoted note β†’
BitcoinIsFuture's avatar BitcoinIsFuture
Do you know who see Bitcoin as data storage? You guessed it, Citrea the shitcoiners. Also Citrea EVM means Ethereum (shitcoin) Virtual Machine. image Jameson Lopp the shitcoiner is investor in Citrea. "We're hearing things like Citrea is better than Ethereum," Chainway Labs co-founder Orkun Mahir Kılıç told CoinDesk. "It'll be better with time, because there's like $1 trillion, as of now, sitting in the Bitcoin blockchain. It is the most secure, battle-tested and decentralized blockchain. And we are bringing decentralized finance to it." 🀑🀑🀑 https://www.coinglass.com/news/91227
View quoted note →
↩ replying to ODELL
Not all but majority of them. Their actions have root cause. How would you explain their actions to blow up OP_RETRUN and this direct cause from Citrea?
image image
How do you explain Core devs not fixing inscriptions spam?
BitcoinIsFuture's avatar BitcoinIsFuture
See the compromised Core devs who rejected Luke's PR that fixes inscription spam. They are the bad actors (the NACKers) They revealed themselves with their public comments on OP_RETRUN being dishonest and manipulative. The guys that ACKed are the good guys we have. image https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28408 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29187 Bitcoin Knots has fixed those issues.
View quoted note →
Odell, you used to be a hero to me in the Bitcoin community. The way you championed privacy and freedom tech (e-cash, CoinJoin, Mutiny Wallet, PayJoin etc) was inspiring. Your strong advocacy for freedom and your bold stance against KYC were important. You told those privacy-hating governments to go fΒ© themselves. I loved that! You seemed like a true freedom fighter. Now you don't take a clear stance in an important debate. It seems like you've adopted a more non-aggressive approach, avoiding clear expressions of your opinions and steering away from contentious issues. I first noticed this change in your stance regarding Saylor and open source development. Now I see you being quiet about the censorship and power grab by certain Core developers. I hope I'm wrong. But it’s disappointing and disheartening to say the least.
↩ replying to npub1fyjq...p6ma
I'll eat mine now. I could be wrong already. I am a offgrid solar bitcoin miner. I know what it looks like to me. Never been called stuoid by a person who knkws me. And I don't understand why people call others names when having different POV. Why are we so obsessed with being right or wrong. We all can see it differently. Not sure if we will ever have consensus on who was right or wrong. Maybe. I am running knots because it makes more sense to me. Not sure what that makes me retarded.
↩ replying to ODELL
It is a proper and conservative stance. One that carries respect. I was running Satoshi v. 27.0/ for almost two years and it worked just fine. I now run knots but understand hesitance on switching with only one dev. I am a fan of node configurability and I believe my nodes resources should be spent on relaying legitimate transactions, not spam that happened to have a cryptographic signature.
We need more implementation teams. I find how both sides acted the last couple months to be what I'd expect out of a shitcoin project. Wouldn't be surprised if this stupidity leads to a company with deep pockets coming out with a "Red Hat" version, either. Watched this same infighting shit play out in the Unix and *nix spaces.
I just want to say thankyou for the opportunity. As institutional investors and retirement funds dump Bitcoin in response to core 30 release, it gives us the opportunity to buy the dip. When enough idiots update to core 30 it will create a hard fork and obviously the blockchain WITHOUT THE CHILD PORN AND SPAM will retain the name Bitcoin. After the fork all the investors and retirement funds will come back. Because we've already seen this playout before.
↩ replying to Kayne
I love how you all uncritically buy the CP narrative the gatekeeping peddle you, rather than realizing this is them doing what they do, gatekeeping and dogmatically keeping purity and shunning sinners and disbelievers. It's not about CP, it's about bringing DeFi to Bitcoin using zk proofs for finality on the Bitcoin L1. No hard-fork needed, those are and will be valid transactions. Thought you all enjoyed free markets? Or is that support wavered once the free market does things (like bitcoin defi) you don't want it to do? These new bitcoiners, I swear. lol.