Why do so many people think that Core is changing consensus rules to allow larger Op_returns to be stored on chain?
Discussion
A lot of this is just influencer fed propoganda..
And the post 2017 wave of bitcoiners don't seem to do much of their own research.
Aye
They're trying to encourage use cases that would otherwise take up memory and leveldb storage to instead use OP_RETURN, which is preferable for making nodes still runnable on commodity hardware.
They did this because they have no idea how how to fix arbitrary data insertion prpblem that they facilitated with segwit+taproot.
It's like that episode of Rick and Morty, where Rick invents a love serum that ends up rewriting the genetic code of the entire planet to be sexually attracted to Morty, requiring further fixes to the human genetic code, over and over, until humanity is a formless pile of goop.
I believe there's fiat and "shitcoin" financial networks that want more capable integration interfaces with Bitcoin.
Either that, or it's a nefarious conspiracy (or both).
People always have two reasons for the things that they do - the one that sounds good, and the real reason.
People are lazy, and are ager to believe anything that gives them positive feelings ("my node matters, I matter for the bitcoin network"). We are irrational animals.
OTOH, the Core dev gang, on avg, are more autistic: they more care about the facts and less about feelings. God bless we have them!
Do they care about this āfactā about how development is meant to be handled?
More gaslighting bullshit word game trickery.
āHaha these retards donāt know what Consensus vs policy means.ā
You really are a scumbag holy shit imagine being a veteran in 2025 and instead of educating newbies you choose to gaslight about this ridiculous change to mempool policy.
I'm being specific and factual because very few people are and I'm sick of it.
The fact of the matter is exactly as I have stated.
If not, send me a link to the codebase and point out where I'm wrong.
Holy shit man arenāt you a dev? This is honestly embarrassing Iām not sure what you are trying to accomplish.
Core v30=
CHANGING MEMPOOL POLICY DEFAULT
Knots and discussion =
MASSIVE USER PROTEST AGAINST THE MEMPOOL POLICY CHANGE.
No one is changing consensus or hard forking.
Again none of you people have ever responded to this tweet from core dev Ava Chow in 2023, Iāve posted it 500 times.
Exactly, so why are there so many people who think that Core is pushing a consensus change? Why is half the media saying bitcoin is forking?
š
Because we are in the middle of a psy-war
The solution is don't trust anybody, especially "bitcoiners"
Realize that bitcoin is designed to be adversarial
Shitcoin-Core should have all their funding pulled.
1. knots users think core v30 changing op_return limit from 80bytes is for āinscriptions and CSAMā
2. hard fork - L0la l33tz published the article with leaked chats from Luke, discussing some new zk proof proposal to censor transactions he doesnāt want.
So basically terms and interpretations all over the shop lol
Who are "my people"? I'm not on either side and have been pretty vocal against Core at times, especially with regard to the way some of them lied about Libbitcoin.
watching bitcoin devs argue about policy defaults feels like debugging open source artwork , everyoneās shouting while iā