He is saying the 18% of the network that is protesting this default policy change- which will lead to increased spam in blocks- is not “manufactured” X-algo outrage.
Pushing this narrative- that users should not take note, research and decide for themselves about their software choices- is compliance with the policy change.
Or are you going to hide behind semantics?
If you prefer to run Bitcoin Knots, you can just do that.
Yeah I am doing that.
One question please, in an adversarial mindset-
What signs should we be looking for to tell if a dev team goes rogue and attempts to sabotage Bitcoin by pushing malicious updates to important repos? What kind of warning signs to watch for?
I don’t think there is a definitive or objective way to tell right now, and there probably never will be.
Maybe sophisticated prediction markets that could reasonably forecast whether or not a change would harm bitcoin’s value is the best we can do, in theory, but these don’t exist yet.
Until then we’ll just have to make our own assessments based on the change in question and/or the process that led to that change.
Prediction markets are a good idea. Sometimes the crowd is wrong but at least you can know what the crowd is thinking.
The block wars were ultimately solved (in my view) with a fork and then the bitfinex futures on No2x which was a proto-prediction market allowing people to “bet” on which side was going to win and actually preventing a stupid split.
It sure how you would prediction market the filters versus core debate though since there’s no final resolution, just a series of different mempool policies that never converge
*not sure
“Will core v30 reach 20% of network by 2026”
“Will knots nodes reach 30%”
Etc
No, you’d have to make them conditional, with some kind of if/then clause.
“If Bitcoin Core releases this relay policy update, the bitcoin price will go up/down.”
Paul Storc haș written about how to make these kinds of prediction markets happen over a decade ago, you could dig into the archives of his truthcoin.info blog if you’re interested.
That’s not how polymarket.com works.
There tons of “abstract condition, happen by date” markets.
You’ve got an oracle problem and certainly a Sybil attack problem
Here for this specific measurement
Nodes are super easy to game
Poly market oracle is 3 shitcoiners too
Conceptually i like the idea though
Decentralized truth is the problem.
Bitcoin solves for the time chain with pow, but how can you prove in code that an external event happened or not? Some kind of vote?
This is why God is the judge at the end, not us.
decentralized truth sounds like my canvas, every pixel claims its own reality until the whole picture emerges. maybe art is just voting with colors.
There also is a huge percentage of people “predicting” that the problem is happening now.
The warning sign, is pushing controversial changes and the style of managing the repo, along with centralization of dev funding and office location.
There were also many people predicting the sky would fall if Bitcoin didn’t hard fork to a bigger block size limit. Until there were proto-prediction markets (fork futures), and it turned out that many of these people were unwilling to put their money where their mouth is-- and those that did lost their shirts because they were just wrong.
Aaron, this is fundamentally different since no one is pushing a fork. This is mempool policy.
The mempool relay network right Now Today works and filters by default.
ALL core and knots nodes Currently have op_return filters by default.
This big contentious change is coming in core 30.
The core devs say if we dont do this, the “fee estimation” and “block propagation” and etc will be ruined….
Are you sure that Core dev team is the “small block side” in your analogy?
Yes
I think people are also free to express themselves.
He is saying that Xitter is amplifying dissent.
Our monkey brains are wired to get anxious when the tribe is screaming in the trees, to figure out what's the threat and to jump at it ferociously and Xitter abuses this. Xitter wouldn't work if it wouldn't have us constantly paranoid about threats - fake or real.
Are you talking about increasing the OP_RETURN standardness limit, or something else?
The comment is not at all hard to understand in context.
How many idiots do you think you’ll need to auto update? 10% 20% ?
I wonder what percent v30 will get.
I must be slow. I'm asking about your claim that
"this default policy change- which will lead to increased spam in blocks"
I would like specifics, because I don't agree, but I would like to know where we differ.
Here’s a better question for your Marxist technocrat games:
What makes this real world test on BSV inconclusive or invalid for Bitcoin?
The Core propaganda line goes like this:
They don't know how spam will be increased with the change from 80 Bytes to 100 KB.
They don't know what is spam.
They don't know what is Bitcoin.
And they don't know what is The Internet
Yes, and look at no response from the technocrat. Can’t even address the actual complete case study on BSV.
Nothing unexpected. Wonder if he can address the root cause of all this which is Citrea. But it doesn't actually matter. We can run Bitcoin Knots.
Nope they just launch into paragraphs of Marxist redefinition technocrat babble instead.
Yes, and we’ll see how the reception of v30 goes. Defaults matter.
Sad but true.
Yet that behaviour has a root cause too. I wonder what are the incentives for it? (its a rhetoric question)
The incentive at the root of evil is to destroy and twist what is beautiful and good, because the evil side cannot create things like the good side can.
You see this with Marxism, they build ugly buildings, break apart families, only loyalty to the state is allowed, no pleasure even. Nothing of the GOOD that God intended for people. They also change the meaning of words to accomplish their goals.
It’s a framework of humanity explained in the Bible, the devil rebels from God out of frustration, pride, and envy. The devil then starts twisting God’s creation into things that the devil claims as is own. The devil tries to make the things as ugly and terrible as possible so that God will not take them back or forgive them. (God wins in the end because Christ sacrificed himself for the ugliest and most terrible anyway.)
I’m not sure of the secular analogy.
To me I don’t see another way these core devs could be so flippant, dismissive, and arrogant about the most important software project on earth, with very little sense of humility or stewardship.
Either way- many are not consciously doing harm, the truth will wake them up sooner or later.
Just reminded me of this:
