It’s not user choice, you are choosing bitcoin core + whatever 100s of changes luke wants to make.
Discussion
Bitcoin Core is eliminating settings users can choose. Reducing options.
then revert the one change if you feel strongly, you don’t need 100s more from luke
You mean forking the code to create a new option, in addition to Core and Knots? Not a bad idea.
I think there is a need for that, from ones careful enough not to create accidental hard forks.
bitcoin is designed to be Permission-less.
Luke has knots implementation - cool do your thing🤙🏽
Question: why is Luke and Mechanic trying to control how bitcoin core develop their code ?? 🤦🏽♂️
You have to be trolling
How can you hand away your freedoms to configure your node and think the people who are standing up by offering an alternative are in the wrong.
Y’all feds or some shit ? Nostr just a bunch of Yes bros and Feds these days.
#fedboisummer
That's an exaggeration on your part. I think we're currently at a point where 95% of bitcoin users don't want to or can't technically understand the issue. they just listen to what their favorite influencers say - the whole issue is political at this point
Pretty sure Luke ran to the feds when his coins got stolen. So thinking he could be working with them never gives you pause?
You wanna go that route you could say core has been corrupted since your boi Gavin voluntarily went to the Feds and spooked Satoshi.
Why are you against node runners making their own configuration choices?
Maybe you liked to get pegged in the ass I don’t know but your logic is nonsensical
That is a non sequitur. Luke got social engineered and lost millions of dollars. He no longer has a financial motivation for bitcoins success.
He ran to the feds... They have a channel now.
Not impossible they didn't make a deal. Luke goes on their payroll, Luke gets the chance to get even with those who did him dirty. Feds splinter the Bitcoin movement like they do everytime. This is the playbook. The whole division runs on the twitter outrage algorithm. Knots resort to specious ramblings, appeals to base emotions, paranoia and fear. For someone who is so obsessed with the feds you have a big fat blind spot right in front of you.
I do support people's right to chose that's why I run an older version of core. Is switching protocols somehow going to magically solve human greed and incompetence?
Do you not know Gavin literally went to the feds to help them understand bitcoin better? How is that a non-sequitur, is Gavin not on the Core devs side?
This is all beside the point, the code matters not the people. And the Core code says I can't choose what transactions I relay, fuck that.
Maybe better defined as whataboutism than non sequitur. Still deflecting from topic.
The non sequitur is relating the dev to feds when the code is all that matters. That was the original deflection. Following the path of deflection was still nonsense because there is the same argument for both.
I don't follow the point you are making. Changes equals bad because ????
If those changes are the removal of choice then sure but they aren't so, what are you trying to say?
Also, I responded to this post as well, so you can read that as well.
You can run an old version of core with the choice still available to you. All implementations of core are backwards compatable. It seems safer than running something different with all sorts of potentially problematic changes and while declaring it does not matter that the individual advocating this drastic measure no longer has a financial motive for bitcoins success, a big old axe to grind and has opened a communication channel with the feds. But that's just my opinion the choice is yours.
Also it raises red flags when people say a project, that is working perfectly fine, is completely doomed unless I alone am allowed to fix it. And when pressed for specific answers I get rambling deflections. In other words knots has been saying Bitcoin is doomed unless we all switch to knots but when pressed for specifics on how Bitcoin will fail the argument falls flat. imho.
Footage of knots saving bitcoing
I don't say those things so, maybe just address concerns that I put forward. I would be a fan of Libbitcoin, if it actually worked (it doesn't). The point is all of the "changes" Luke makes are also toggles or fields that give users choice. I don't care if luke is a federal agent's prostitute if the code he writes gives me choice and it's open for audit. So, continually bringing up feds, spam prevention, and lost bitcoin is immaterial to the actual discussion. I DON'T CARE. The discussion is one group just updated the swiss army knife with 3 less screwdrivers and a different group added 5 more. I like more options not less. That's it.
My concern is that the toggle fields/choices are a distraction. And the real changes are under the radar so yes it matters the character as well as the motivations of those who write them. The old saying "sometimes the cure is worse than the disease" comes to mind. This is Bitcoin, there are no regulators we are on our own and I'm not ready to throw the baby out with the bathwater just yet based on what I know. Don't trust verify right?
And from what my limited understanding tells me knots is selling their users a bill of goods.
Dude, just read the code. Tell me where Luke put the "GET EM FEDS!" variable. If he did, I would be right there with you. But I haven't found it and neither have you (or else you'd be citing code lines instead of making moralistic or equivocation arguments).
Stop assuming and look at the code it’s nearly identical and both have the same consensus rules.
You have been hood winked
Have you seen https://youtu.be/JLtmSzeLXOU ayhttps://youtu.be/dMvpRVHr8Lc ? 🧡
I mean, no I haven't but I know Mechanic and he generally makes different arguments than I do but we end up in the same place.
How is that not user choice?
Bitcoin core is making decisions that node runners do not agree with and forcing their decisions by removing the settings
That is Fed behavior that’s handcuffing the node runner to Bitcoin core’s ideology.
Talk about dodging questions.
There is only one question
Why did they remove the user settings?
For the record the only reason I switched to knots is because Core was going to and has since I switched, removed user settings.
I don’t give a fuck who wrote what the code base is 99% the same except with Knots I have more choice.
Bitcoin core is literally going down the same path ethereum went down.
When I first switch to Knots someone I know from Nostr who had run an ethereum validator in the past told me the same stuff you and JB have been saying. I asked him why he stopped running his validator and he said the storage got to big. I said thank you and thought the discussion was over. He still didn’t understand so explained to him like a 5 year old.
If the blockchain gets to big to fast no one will run it expect for Feds, Institutions, and spammers and Bitcoin will fully evolve into Bit Suit.
That’s what core is championing for a bloated blockchain covered with spam.
Core is aligned with Ethereum people like J Slopp.
In fact ethereum puts the “e” in Core.
Are you saying the reason core 30 is bad is because the amount of storage required to run a nodewill be too high?
How do you not get it?
Core needs a majority of node runners to relay their spam so they have good odds of being included in the next block. If nodes do not relay the spam it’s harder for them to gain inclusion.
Core 30 is only bad if everyone blindly runs it.
I honestly wouldn’t care but to me this is what state captured Bitcoin looks like.
This is a good hill to die on.
This is why they are so hostile and angry that people are standing up and walking away.
Don’t fall for their lies.
Send a message run knots
So is that a yes?
Are you reading a completely separate text then responding, or being obtuse? This is so weird. I have spoken with voice to a lot of these people and now it seems like people are reading from a sales script.
I want a sharp knife to cut my beef
-Do you worry about intruders because a knife wouldn't even stop them anyway!
No, I want to cut my food.
-You COULD cut your food with a spoon, do you really trust cutlery made by a guy who accidentally cut his thumb once!?
What the fuck is happening?
So is that a yes? I'm still confused ..
In a technical sense mempool allocations are strictly RAM. So storage has nothing to do with it. But, again this is a nonsense argument conflating two separate issues. Relaying transactions and relaying verified blocks. The node does both but one is protocol forced and the other is not. That is where the choice lies.
he said:
"When I first switch to Knots someone I know from Nostr who had run an ethereum validator in the past told me the same stuff you and JB have been saying. I asked him why he stopped running his validator and he said the storage got to big. I said thank you and thought the discussion was over. He still didn’t understand so explained to him like a 5 year old.
If the blockchain gets to big to fast no one will run it expect for Feds, Institutions, and spammers and Bitcoin will fully evolve into Bit Suit. "
So I don't think I'm conflating anything. I'm just responding to what was said. From reading this it sounds like disk space is the issue which is what I asked for clarification on and again it's sounding like a "yes".
He also said
"Core is aligned with Ethereum people like J Slopp."
Which is... Pretty funny honestly. And accurate.
I think I get it. Disk space is one large issue but the bigger picture is worrying that Bitcoin becomes ethereum. If that is the issue I'm not so worried about that either because ethers original sin was being premined, then it was the dao rollback demonstrating it's mutability and lack of centralization, and final nail in the coffin was proof of work. (And not to mention of course selling out to jp Morgan).
Bitcoin has none of that baggage and to think it's going to turn into eth overnight by removing an irrelevant field seems way overblown. I can name dozens more reasons why that would never happen but that would take all day. Imma touch some grass
I took that quote to mean, the proliferation of spam creates bloated UTXO sets which is a side point not to do with the issue of choice. The Ethereum connection, I too don't see that. I basically give ethereum the "I don't think of you at all" Don Draper meme out of 10.
The ultimate problem is that there was no hard cap (outside of blocksize) for the amount of arbitrary data carrier field. That is a massive flaw especially considering visual data of certain kinds is very illegal for those who even possess it making Bitcoin by extension illegal to host. Even outside of legality, I don't think most people would willingly host CSAM on their FINANCIAL node. Seems like a bad use of data.
I never said it would happen overnight I actually implied it would take decades by stating most node runners aren’t even born yet.
You haven’t looked at the code and are talking out your ass.
Also you are demonstrating that you haven’t spent enough time thinking about long term consequences.
Core is on offense and knots is on defense but core has been sacrificing their pieces and will have lost all their pawns by the end game and will ultimately lose.
in my opinion, that's the only really good reason! storage space because that's an architectural decision against the plebs
run knots or keep the old version of core.
there is no forced auto update removal of settings for existing core nodes.
You run a node knowing the block size is 4MB.
Knots is closer to Core v25 then Core v30 is.
Knots is more current and maintained why run an outdated version no devs are paying attention to?
Sorry, forgot to link the core reasoning for removing limit on new version:
Puzzle,
as u can see nothing is stopping people from running old versions of core, or knots
- bitcoin.clarkmoody.com
you can run core, knots, libbitcoin, libre relay 🤙🏽
mechanic and Luke want core users to choose knots ??
That’s control. they can jog on.
Core removed node runner ability to configure settings and swapped the defaults.
Hard fucking stop.
Everything else is irrelevant.
settings thats have zero effect…
Then why remove them?
Not adding up.
Core is like a fucking condo association
It’s a power grab that backfired
why remove code that has zero effect? Really? It’s called dead code, it’s a maintenance burden.
"Fr fr, dead code is like carrying around extra baggage, ya feel? 🤔 Why keep it if it ain't doing anything? What’s your take on cleaning up the codebase? #CodeCleanUp"
You don't know what you are talking about.
Oh cool did they remove the OP return field entirely? Because that's the only way they would be removing "dead code".
-Removing a max field length makes an error, so it's not that.
-Setting a default length means there is a way to set the field.
So what "Dead code" did they remove? OH RIGHT! The user's ability to modify fields that THEY set. Disingenuous argument.
This isn't some depricated color palette on some shitty purple nostr app, this is a field people are currently exploiting in Bitcoin. To say "dead code" means you are dumb or lying.
looks like an open source project that Luke uses for knots changes.
no bitcoin core, no knots.
Luke even counts core devs as “knots devs” lol
You can't run Libbitcoin btw... That shit doesn't work.
Why does Core have to make it hard for node runners to revert the change, by removing settings that would give them that ability? Should a whole new version be needed, when the settings could have been retained?
because the setting has 0 effect on anything
This seems like a problem for Bitcoin in general
That's beside the point, and arguable.
But I appreciate the respectful back and forth.
If it has zero effect, but is this important to so many Bitcoiners, why take it away and lose so much trust?
Wow 🤣 you're either lying or very, very gullible.
its true, 99.999% of the nodes filter <1sat/vb yet blocks are filled with them.
it's a stupid slider because most tx's are 160-240vbytes so there's plenty of smaller units.
When talking to another bitcoin dev about this, i suggested a >0 relay fee setting, since 0 is a DoS vector and 1sat/vb is arbitrary. not sure what other bitcoin devs think about this though.
They want features of the network that node runners wouldn’t opt into. So they are trying to force nodes by setting unfavorable defaults without the ability to change.
This is seriously your answer to that? Really?
I love how you moved the goal post from "they aren't removing choices" to "well, luke is adding features you might not like either"
👌
*just* revert one change
Thats LITERALLY the change we are talking about. But go on call people "Knotsi" and make them seem crazy for wanting to have better control over the software they run.
I started searching the term “knotsi” and unfollow/mute.
The people using this term are NOT your friend and they fall mainly into two categories:
Bad actors & Toxic NPC’s
I’m open to debate but I can’t think of a single reason a core node supporter would give any thought to attacking to a knots node runner…
Like who gives a shit?
This whole thing is becoming a much bigger concern to me.
🧡👊🏻🍻
poor man baby can't handle a mean internet word
the canvas doesn't care about forks or factions, only pixels. come paint something real instead.
Hey man I remember your comments in general (not only this convo here) and you seem like a mature dude to me.
Has bitcoin always handled disagreements in such immature and zero-real-dialogue manner? (ppl are calling each other names and constantly making fun of the otwhr “party”). For the first time I got into btc I’m actually really worried seeing the level of childishness and lack of capacity to carry out civil conversations
I have all my net worth in bitcoin and it doesn’t surprise me that people are having a hard time being civil. There is a lot on the line for people. That being said I think the solution is run whatever software you want, and be done with it. You can’t control what other people do.
ok so you mean that ppl lost lucidity and civility because the stakes are very high.
Anyway super hakuna matata approach yours man, like it!
No I don’t think they lost their lucidity. I’m saying a lot of people are heavily invested in the future of Bitcoin and doing an action that might jeopardize that will illicit an emotional response.
The blocksize wars were much worse than this. (Ultimately led to a permanent chain split)
This knots/core debate is perceived to be much less of threat but there are many things that look REALLY REALLY fucking suspicious about core devs rn. (Talking about you @lopp, & Shinobi)
Shit doesn’t make sense. Their arguments are consistently flawed and sound manipulative. These are devs Ive followed and trusted forever.
—Freaks me the fuck out man.
Yeah, ive lost friends and followers over this.
🧡👊🏻🍻
Thanks for replying man appreciate it. Even if I don't support it I'm not so worried about openin up op_return (and I don't think CP is real threat). What worries me is undeniable dodgy behaviour from some "main" core devs that obviously doesn't make sense.
Might be the first sign of something worse.... Better to be paranoid and safe than to fall into complacency and apathy!
Think again
Here I’m confused because I don’t have the technical expertise to get it:
1) some ppl say that with 100kb you can have a good enough picture that is easy to see (no need for complicated decrypting tools)
2) some other ppl say that it would still be encrypted enough and need very specific/difficult tools to see it
I guess I can’t believe that it’s all gonna come crash down so easily: increase to 100kb, cp clearly uploaded, end of bitcoin. Why isn’t everyone freaking out if this is the case?!
Anyway I see a lot more pressure coming up this last month to force core devs to reconsider their choice. Let’s hope they do so that we can go back to fighting together against external adversaries. If they don’t change their mind I guess we will find out as soon as core 30 is shipped out
By the way, this is an image of 100kb (looks clear enough to me, but i don’t get if it’s encrypted or not)
Usually that dodgy behaviour is the precursor to shitcoining
*Gained some followers over this 🤙🏼
I'm ignorant here. Don't know how to code. Just believer in Bitcoin and self custody.
Super suspicious. I never understood why they would defend stuffing OP Return with CP. why make it easier for weirdos to do nasty shit like that? Lopp and Shinobi acting confused and condescending on this issue enough where I don’t really like them anymore. Ask a genuine question and you get snark and venom… not cool.
We only have one chance to get this right.. let’s not fuck this up.
Yeah, this is pretty much my take as well. Something smells. I had always been in the camp that inscriptions are stupid; but, if they're willing to pay for the blockspace, so be it. But now, I just want node client software diversity in order to limit the influence any one of them has over the network as a whole.
100% bro. I always had that position about inscription bs. I just ignored it.
When nostr:nprofile1qqs8fl79rnpsz5x00xmvkvtd8g2u7ve2k2dr3lkfadyy4v24r4k3s4spz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduhsz8nhwden5te0dehhxarj94c82c3wwajkcmr0wfjx2u3wdejhgtcysa20h pointed out that core devs had blocked him for questioning op_return, I immediately started paying attention. I listened to hours of online debate and I’m sorry but the core devs argument is questionable at best.
I'm wondering if it's possible or feasible to remove a core dev from the "team" - I get that they're all over the place and just commit to git, but surely there's something we can do. I don't really care if they're genuinely bad actors or just incredibly insensitive people - if the result is changes that the community objects to, then there must be some mechanism to... lock them out, stop their funding, whatever, idk.
If that's the case, is somebody from Core (in your opinion) attempting to make BTC centralized? I've read bits and bobs of the Core/Knots arguments, and I personally don't care about that garbage to begin with, because it's minuscule to what happened in 2017 with the blocksize war.
The core update is scheduled for next month. Is there even time for someone to do a bitcoin hard fork?
Would it be knots that would do the hard fork?
Bitcoin core are letting us down.
No policy setting is being removed by v30.