What happened?
Discussion
I don’t think anything happened I’ve just been getting caught up on the drama lol. I saw Luke/Ocean have been making legal threats towards people running core 30 and floating around a soft fork. I also felt like I’ve changed my mind on this given what’s happened the last few months and wanted to acknowledge that too.
well drama aside.
From a technical standpoint, what was your position and why did you change it and what is it now?
I am sincerely intrigued and want to know what you think so I can apply it to my own thinking too if possible.
my view was that I wanted node operators to have more control over their mempool policy and I didn’t appreciate that a centralized group could and did change default policy across the majority of the network (assuming people upgrade their nodes). therefore, I was mentally in the Knots camp and even used Knots as my daily driver for some time.
however, pushing your software on the basis that it is preventing child porn in bitcoin is disingenuous, and pushing for a soft fork in this situation just doesn’t make any sense to me. There have been a few of these dishonest arguments from Luke/Mechanic/Ocean and that raise some pretty major red flags in my mind.
I’m all for more node implementations, I believe we need more diverse implementations to secure a healthy network for the future, however Knots does not seem trustworthy to me at this point. For now I’m running 29.0 and not upgrading or switching back to Knots.
this is my own opinion that is subject to change lol
I could be wrong, but I think Knots is based on core with modifications to give more control. And still remains open source.
Despite the drama, I don't think Knots requires any trust.
Personally I am running a few nodes, some with knots, some with 29.
I’d rather just manually configure core 29.0 at this point. seems safer.
What would a soft fork look like?
Telling people that doing something might result in legal problems is simply warning them. He's not legally threatening anything or anyone lol
this seems pretty disingenuous to me given that anyone can already put criminal images in the chain. feels like Bcash or Craig Wright and someone with ulterior motives more than actually trying to secure bitcoin
Agree to disagree. I think its disingenuous to remove context of data storage. Backdoor work-a-rounds can be morally and (potentially) legally justified if those work-a-rounds are being addressed or attempting to be thwarted. When data storage just becomes another use case its much harder to make moral and/or legal justifications.
Which- if knots camp is correct (time will tell) puts a unnecessary burden on pleb full node runners over time.
Without pleb noderunners I wouldn't be so optimistic on bitcoin on a long time horizon. Trust very well might slowly erode if node count goes down over time. Turning bitcoin into just another shitcoin.
We shall see.
this is fair. and I agree we should be making it easier for plebs to run nodes, not harder. thanks for taking the time to respond, it’s nice having real conversations and not just arguing online. i’m trying to learn lol
My Knots is running just fine, or is it???