I hear we should normalize running forks of bitcoin core.
🤔
Discussion
Your node your rules
Biodiversity is good
I’ve been trying to wrap my head around these issues popping up and I have way more questions than answers. I run a node, have a small personal miner and self custody, but I’m pretty new to this.
Without fully understanding what’s going on, logically I question the motivations of devs who are trying to shut out nostr:nprofile1qqs8fl79rnpsz5x00xmvkvtd8g2u7ve2k2dr3lkfadyy4v24r4k3s4spz9mhxue69uhkummnw3ezuamfdejj7qg7waehxw309ahx7um5wgkhqatz9emk2mrvdaexgetj9ehx2ap0ege3s8 and nostr:nprofile1qqs0m40g76hqmwqhhc9hrk3qfxxpsp5k3k9xgk24nsjf7v305u6xffcpp4mhxue69uhkyunz9e5k7tcpremhxue69uhkummnw3ez6ur4vgh8wetvd3hhyer9wghxuet59uhe5qhq out of the conversation. I’m leaning towards running Bitcoin knots but not sure if that is the solution.
My main question is: Running Core or Knots, what does that due to Bitcoin itself? Is that like a hard fork from block size wars… Bitcoin or BCH.
If the answer to this is too long to write out, can you point me in the right direction to keep digging into this?
Running a different implementation is not a fork of the chain.
BCH changed consensus rules. Current debate is largely centered on configuration for mempool policy. It has no impact on what is consensus valid for transactions.