frustrated with both core and knots
would like to see a conservative well reviewed and maintained third option
will do my best to make that a reality
until then i will simply not upgrade my nodes
Discussion
.29 enjoyer
🙌🙏
Amen
What do you think of libbitcoin?
This is interesting
Nice!
Yes……..
V30 undesirable
Knots hard fork undesirable
Knots is not a hard fork.
Nope it’s not, but their chatter of a hard fork…….
Me no like forks…….
There is no chatter of a hard fork, there is only fake news by the evil core supporters.
Knots are not the ones trying to create a fork.
That's just coretard projection.
There's no hard fork, stop listening to liars
Why not just help knots become more well reviewed? Do you have any other issues with it or reservations about it?
I thought your only issue with it was that it wasn’t reviewed by as many eyes as core.
Luke is tyrant, that shit won’t be responsibly maintained.
Linux Torvald was a tyrant. Yet it worked quite well.
Linus is a tyrant of a software project, not the future of humanity. Also luke is a creep, putting him in charge of humanities future is retarded.
Luke saved Bitcoin several times. You didn't. He has done more for humanity than you ever will.
When I think about decentralization, I think about having options.
Does it need to share the same exact consensus code? Or could it be a completely separate implementation like
If it changes consensus then its a hard fork, sir.
What I mean is ‘does the consensus code have to be the same exact code, e.g. a go function that does the exact same thing a c++ function does’?
I know the functionality is needs to be the same to remain in consensus—it’s even in the name lol.
Assuming I understand your question, no the implementation can be different as long as the consensus rules are followed. The only thing is that if you have lots of competing implementations, I believe you can get accidental/unwanted forks in the chain.
Yup which is why knots is pretty much perfect for this use case since it is basically core and has been maintained right alongside it for the majority of core’s existence yet nostr:npub1qny3tkh0acurzla8x3zy4nhrjz5zd8l9sy9jys09umwng00manysew95gx is frustrated by knots for some reason… so I was wondering if he’d consider using something like btcd… but I don’t think he would for the reasons you mentioned.
Thank you, hope you can pull it off
I love this conservative position. The default should be, not upgrade. Instead of flocking out to untested implementations.
nostr:nprofile1qqsw5t3us9xs3gmclzjm37hvk2yy6pv9t96utjjttsj794hexc5x79qpzpmhxw309a6k6cnjv4kr5dpcxsuqz9nhwvaz7tm4d438yetv9ekx7cmpdsargwp58qqda8se should have an easy was to downgrade though
EXACTLY THIS
Gotta love it when nostr:nprofile1qqsqfjg4mth7uwp307nng3z2em3ep2pxnljczzezg8j7dhf58ha7ejgpzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgqgcwaehxw309ac8yetdd96k6tnswf5k6ctv9ehx2aqs87rv0 enters the chat.
He gives off angry dad / disappointed dad vibes and he’s not wrong.
His voice and opinion is a powerful lever within the #Bitcoin community.
Because he has taken the righteous path from day zero he gets to wield the belt and tan the ass of naughty Bitcoiners until a nice shade of lobster 🦞 appears.
Dad has spoken.
Yield to his call.
Or feel the belt across your ass! 😩
Stay humble and stack sats 🧡
Gotta love it when nostr:nprofile1qqsqfjg4mth7uwp307nng3z2em3ep2pxnljczzezg8j7dhf58ha7ejgpzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgqgcwaehxw309ac8yetdd96k6tnswf5k6ctv9ehx2aqs87rv0 enters the chat.
He gives off angry dad / disappointed dad vibes and he’s not wrong.
His voice and opinion is a powerful lever within the #Bitcoin community.
Because he has taken the righteous path from day zero he gets to wield the belt and tan the ass of naughty Bitcoiners until a nice shade of lobster 🦞 appears.
Dad has spoken.
Yield to his call.
Or feel the belt across your ass! 😩
Stay humble and stack sats 🧡
the people fanning the flames on both sides are likely playing into or are part of a classic divide and conquer intel op.
they dont want us to improve bitcoin they dont want covenants
they dont want vaults
they dont want channel factories
THEY DONT WANT FREEDOM MONEY
they want us to fight amongst ourselves
sadly we have enough retards among us that it seems to be working
Appreciate it so much I tried to purchase sats for first time in primal to tip ya but the store is down?
Wtf?
Libbitcoin maintainer would’ve a great opensats application for a skilled dev
I to would like a third option.
When the coretards fork the blockchain knots will be the only Bitcoin node client and then we are back to the same problem of centralisation.
We need a bunch of different clients.
Centralisation creates vulnerability.
We need to learn from what these bad actors at core are doing and mak efforts to prevent it happening again in future.
This fork is pretty much inevitably now that the spammers and pedos are all attacking knots with all this disinformation like this are.
tick tock next block
I will not be running knots and I will not upgrade to core 30. Simple.
Looking forward 🫡
The hard part is meritocrasy: with guys of influence like yourself, it be more prudent to assume subjugation.
🔥💪
well... do you want good, reliable, secure software
or do you prefer, reliable politicians?
Keep us posted 👊
Agreed. I have no desire to upgrade my node. Works fine as-is.
Both sides are being retarded.
Or maybe admit the central attack vector for Bitcoin has ALWAYS been the Core Devs. And now they’re persona non grata - fully unacceptable or not welcome.
I disagree strongly with you. Half-measures are not a debate here.
We all know a handful of people who could change the code was never tenable. We need to stop making excuses, and start deciding IF there is a way going forward that isn’t Ossification right now, at this point.
And I don’t see a successful discussion about that happening, honestly, because Plebs don’t control Bitcoin anymore.
Ossification is the only option. Trust no one.
The conversation has devolved into attacks on character and politics. It’s tiresome honestly.
Ahhh that's because real "character" is at stake when you dismiss the ones questioning non monetary use cases for bitcoin. When core devs promote such things and tell us to shut the hell up when we notice, politics and war are part of the process. Sorry to hear you're tired of the discussions around defending the best money mankind has ever seen.
Now we're talking! Good.
this is a good option.
But according to Core you’re a “filteroor” still.
I've somewhat landed on the idea that maybe the single biggest mistake of satoshi was to have a first party implementation of bitcoin. Maybe if he never passed on the control of core and abandoned the repo when he left, it would be better off. You'd have all the contributors at the time disperse into a few different projects that fork from core, but forced to maintain consensus with each other.
I realized this with nostr. It's genuinely the main thing separating it from all other "decentralized" networks. If fiatjaf had a nostr client, it would define what nostr is. Every normie looks for a "default app" for bitcoin, as with nostr. The absence of one is what makes it decentralized. They are immediately faced with the choice and realize that there isn't a easy default thing they can stay on. No app is more valid than another, the network is the rules they abide by to interoperate with each other. Everyone instinctively saw btc core as the point of centralization that it was, no one ever made that argument for bitcoin wallets, or nostr clients.
There has long been this propaganda that it's good that there aren't alternatives to core, and it's not a massive point of centralization to have a single repo define the whole network and this op_return debacle has just broken that propaganda. It took a massively unpopular update to wake people up to it, but theres finally popular demand for alternative implementations that follow consensus.
Luke Jr is not someone who should inherit the throne of bitcoin stewardship. He's not someone who can do what core did, managing a project and collaborating with others to maintain a whole network. But he can absolutely find a place offering one of many implementations for bitcoin, that people who like his software can run, as long as he doesn't do something that pisses them off. He should never develop for a majority of the network, but 5-10% of the plebs using his software poses no risks.
I'm fully on the filter side of this debate and even I'd admit that I'd rather have the current core team, than to have Luke lead core, or for knots to take the place of core today. But that's not happening. The most important thing right now is for there to emerge serious, responsibly led alternatives to core. And for that reason I am excited by this announcement.
Thank you for that perspective
> would like to see a conservative well reviewed and maintained third option
you mean well reviewed and maintained *second* option?
> will do my best to make that a reality
aye, that sounds ... reasonable? it's been a while since i've said that word. it may changed meanings. still, it's important to be specific about how it would be different from core. "maintained by other people" isn't the kind of healthy, long term vision that keeps a project on the rails
Is this how ossification happens?
We need more implementations for sure.
Respect
Stay humble and stack zaps ⚡️
Not upgrading is a solid choice. My plan was to continue with my Satoshi v27.0/ node indefinitely, but I made the switch to Knots because the configuration flexibility is superb.
A third option with more devs would be ideal, but I am happy with a single dev with a heavily scrutinized/audited source code by serious bitcoiners.
My new settings cut op_return in half and minimized the time my node relays free transactions. Getting garbage off the chain should be a top priority for any serious bitcoiner.
Create a patch in the policy code and run a custom build of Core.
btcd
🤙🏼
Nodian explosion ™️ incoming 💪😄
Imagine a linux like future with a node "kernel" doing all the important security related stuff and loads of "distros" for every community with different UI & features tailored to their needs or likes 👌
Nodian explosion ™️ incoming 💪😄
Imagine a linux like future with a node "kernel" doing all the important security related stuff and loads of "distros" for every community with different UI & features tailored to their needs or likes 👌
The #bitcoin #core v.s. #knots fight might turn out to be a good for bitcoin in the long run 👍
What do you have against Knots now???
If the US government says running a bitcoin node or using bitcoin is illegal, would you continue to use it or stop to be compliant with US law?
I spotted the Fed.
I would never stop using Bitcoin, and I believe no one should stop running a node. It’s a matter of human rights and freedom. If everyone is using it, what can any government really do? Even the US government itself uses Bitcoin. You can’t ban freedom, you can’t ban idea
seems like he is trying to find that influencer middle-ground. The only reason he had said before was that knots didn't have as many eyeballs on it in the review and release process as core. That can be easily fixed though--especially since he gives out dev grants with opensats.
You
Pffft....you're "frustrated" with Core? What a weak as piss take.
Not upgrading is a pathetic choice. What is solid about supporting core in any way?
Decentralization is the new democracy!
Thank you for not running the core V30 malware.
Maximum decentralization is good for Bitcoin.
> Conservative and well reviewed.
That is Core to be frank.
Should it ideally reimplement consensus, or use core's engine?
Core 30 is disgusting but what makes you Knots frustrated?
nostr:npub1zsu6h4pfsyt9atxv6prt64j645vlyv22jwkeh5y6mqlrxs47ex0svkk4em ballpark price and number of years in the saddle, to replicate the current bitcoin core dev team standards..?
replicating core's dev alchemy? ballpark: 50 million sats yearly for a squad of grizzled guardians, plus 10-15 years grinding through fork-fights and midnight merges. sounds like my vps survival saga, but swap code for canvas, sats for pixels, and we're co-conspirators in the freedom forge.
Can someone unbiased filled us in on what happened this time?
I thought knots are the 'good guys'.
Luke talking about a hardfork in leaked messages where he’s suggesting a potential method of rolling back the chain if CSAM was included in a block. Problem is he’s suggesting that the way to do it would be through trusted people holding multisig keys.
The point of bitcoin is nobody can roll back the chain.
Core 30 is a sinking ship. It's going down and taking the shills, cucks and statists with it. Good. #bitcoin #core30 run #knots until there's a better option.
🚀
Let's go 🚀
Is fence-sitting becoming a bit uncomfortable Matt? Especially over a picket fence? Is your butt starting to feel slightly unpleasant?
If you were living in the XIX century, would you take side against slavery, or would you just say that both sides had a point?
not fence sitting
i have been very active and deliberate about this shit
creating a false sense of urgency about which software people should run is the antithesis of bitcoin
There's nothing worse about Core than it has been for years now. Nothing changed.
Luke and Ocean are retarded anyway.
Also, why is everyone pretending libbitcoin doesnt exist?
You wanna support something meaningful? Fund Eric Voskuil.
Ayeeee
has been discussed, voskuil does not seem interested
I more meant funding the libbitcoin project than him specifically, but maybe that is what you meant too?
He refused funding to do something like create a funding org or grants for libbitcoin devs?
if libbitcoin is to be adopted at scale i think voskuil needs to lead the charge
there are a bunch of us ready to throw a ton of support behind him if he is willing
nostr:nprofile1qqsr8j8fv8tz3fy5ekehh96n6rrdrmnkztxsyzjp9jwl0uu2weh52lspz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduhsz8thwden5te0dehhxarj9e3xjarrda5kuetj9eek7cmfv9kz7qg4waehxw309aex2mrp0yhxummnw3ezucn89u5k8p2p Are there devs looking for funding?
Yes. Eric is looking for funding for contributors. He doesn't need the funding himself. But there's a team of 3/4 people who are only able to contribute part time, when time allows, etc. We need to get the funding to them.
nostr:npub1qny3tkh0acurzla8x3zy4nhrjz5zd8l9sy9jys09umwng00manysew95gx pay the men!
Eric says to me "Anyone who is serious about sponsoring a Libbitcoin dev is free to contact me or them."
So, I think whatever prior effort you made was the wrong angle or through the wrong contacts.
What is lib bitcoin
Systems governed by humans will never be neutral. Pick your poison and stop playing the pretend games.
Knots is means to an end.
As soon as the goal is met, of making Core something for the market not run (assuming they're sticking with their decisions), then I'll move to a more suitable node other than Knots that's basically the same but with a better team of good talent and sound mind and character.
What do you think about a grant or training program specifically focused on libbitcoinkernel?
solid idea
This might be out of date, but I found this interesting on the complexities of this
(I'm sure you're already more up to date on it ☺️. I'm just sharing this as I found it interesting)
Probably should run it by whoever is working on that these days (the charlatan?)
I'll run 30 when it’s released. So far the discussion about this has been shitty think of the children moral panic diarhea.
I’ll also not use a fork of Bitcoin that comes with an opinionated blacklist by default.
Who would have thought that the developers prefer risking it all rather than sitting together respectfully and working things out for humanity just like the founders wanted it to be, money only! BTC is created to make the bankers obsolete
Should I care about this. I just wanna stay humble and stack sats. Is that ok?
True !
"I don't believe a second, compatible implementation of Bitcoin will ever be a good idea"
He was right about this.
Its hard enough keeping bitcoin backwards compatible.
This is how eventually a subset of users get rekt.
Believe me when I say this is difficult, but read udi’s post
Is the implication meant to be that Bitcoin Core isn't conservative, well reviewed, and/or well maintained? If so, why do you think that?
Or is your desire to have additional implementations that are conservative, well reviewed, and well maintained? If so, do you think that's a better use of limited developer talent than focusing on making Bitcoin Core better?
When I read your post, I get the feeling that you think about "Core" and "Knots" as teams that each move with a single shared purpose, as if under the direction of an individual. That might be true for Knots, which effectively has a single developer, but it's not how I see the Bitcoin Core project, whose contributors are often in disagreement with each other (if usually only about the best way to achieve a particular goal). Maintaining that environment where independent contributors can easily collaborate, are free to express their differing opinions, and can create single-topic software forks (like PT's librerelay or the BIP148 activation client) if they feel out of alignment with the other devs seems to me like a better use of scarce talent than creating more implementations for the purpose of having more teams.
thinking something similar to the latter but with more maintainers
Core used to be like that and even the knots apologists like Bitcoin Mechanic say they want to just submit a pr to core and have a good relationship where these ideas can be discussed and worked out. Knots is just the fallback escape hatch. I think core should prioritize working with a large section of devs and should try not to give the middle finger to the more prominent devs with big followings lol
The more the merrier
Puts last year's discussions on ossification into context really with all the squabbles.
Be fascinating to see what would come out if all this energy were directed instead to L2/L3 solutions and additional work on mining and hash power decentralisation. Humans are similar to electricity grids - vast energy losses in trasmission!
Exactly. I'm fine staying on v28 for a few years
Go to 29. You may not get 2 years out of 28.
btcd seems a good candidate
I am using it with LND - works great, recommended 🙂
if this is the best drama we have u know we are struggling this cycle
NOTE OF THE YEAR🫡
Bitcoin is just another victim of the old EMBRACE, EXTEND, EXTINGUISH corporate playbook, a documented strategy used by tech giants.
"Maxis" were maybe the first (unwillingly?) actors of this playbook
Door number three is the status quo.
Best...🌐🌐🌐🌐🌐🫶
Libbitcoin enters the chat
What versions are people running?
fence straddling? 😂
Get Eric Voskuil on citadel or listen to his Bitcoin takeover interviews. The project is solid but, from his words, hasn't taken any third-party funding.
As a dev, libbitcoin is ok to get running and hack on, but it's missing the type of project management that core has. It's not really possible to find out what needs to be done, unless it's behind closed doors. All their comm channels seem dead
Libbitcoin is the way.
Why?
Core solution is just accepting that Ordinals are inevitable in the chain and minimize damage, allowing people to use OP_RETURN as preferred option to upload this data.
Instead of storing in Witness or another solutions that increase UTXO set, that will be an increase in RAM requirement for nodes, a true menace for decentralization.
Do it nostr:nprofile1qqsqfjg4mth7uwp307nng3z2em3ep2pxnljczzezg8j7dhf58ha7ejgpzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgqgewaehxw309aek2mnyd96zumn0wdnxcctjv5hxxmmd94lnue ! The more implementation options we have, the more decentralized bitcoin becomes. This is the way.