You seriously care more about whatβs in the mempool than whatβs in the actual blockchain?
Thatβs like caring more about whatβs on the menu than what food the waiter gives you.
Discussion
No, it's keeping the fence up on m garden even though people can jump over it. It signals my property and correct behaviour and usage. Dude, either you want sound money or you don't, there is no in-between. This isn't a technical issue , please stop larping as though it is.
Wow, what a useful fence!
BTW, that's a gate. Of course it won't work If you don't build it right. The answer is to make it better instead of pulling down.
If youβre not willing to fork the chain, nothing you do will work.
Actually, not even forking will work, because thereβs countless different ways to embed arbitrary data in a blockchain. Youβll never be able to stop all of them.
Itβs all meaningless maxi purity virtue signaling. Peak retarded behavior.
Of course it is, I should know my place and not question the mighty Core Devs.
No. Please question Core devs. Constantly review and check them.
But you should actually know what youβre talking about. Which you (and every caught up in Luke/Mechanicβs crusade) donβt.
A huge signal you are also missing is that people (the market) doesn't want this spam on chain or they would be using ALTs like ETH and Solana where it has "utility".
Therefore the QED anger at Bitcoin Devs for helping facilitate this garbage.
Core devs arenβt βfacilitating this garbage.β
Itβs very simple. You cannot accurately predict the next block if youβre deliberately ignoring certain transactions. This is very bad for fee estimation, mining centralization, and other aspects of the ecosystem.
You, like most of the people on this stupid crusade, havenβt seriously thought through the ramifications of what you support (or even if itβs even effective), because itβs really all about virtue signaling that youβre a βpureβ maxi.
They are, with the spam filters removed, more spam can be built on Bitcoin like rollups.
Where are the proposals from Core to make spam harder? Oh they can't be bothered with that bcos they own companies that spam on Bitcoin.
Wake the fuck up.
More gaslighting.
"you dont have an opinion unless you fork"
Why even have a discussion then about anything? As soon as you disagree with a Core PR you think someone should just say nothing and fork immediately even before its merged?
I didnβt say you donβt have an opinion, I said your opinion is useless because youβre not actually enforcing it.
Youβre virtue signaling for likes on social media. Nothing about running Knots or attacking Core devs does anything to remove spam off the bitcoin blockchain.
I think it does. It's a signal for stronger spam measures in the future. If Core aren't up for it, other true Bitcoiners can step up and stop this Rollup crap they have planned.
Itβs a completely useless and ineffective signal. Which is worse than no signal- it shows that you have no power. A sign of weakness.
And it incentives miners to start building private relay networks instead of people using the public mempool, and thatβs a very bad trend.
There is no public mempool.
Don't discount shit posting and memes making fun of them. Psychological combat works too.
Yes, I know different nodes have different mempools.
My point is that youβre pushing more transaction into private relays that miners operate themselves.
This create MORE centralization. Small mining pools wonβt be able to build these relay mechanisms.
Youβre not protecting bitcoin, youβre damaging it.
It doesn't. It's the opposite of what you say. By removing filters they then open the door to more spam and crap like rollups that will do more damage and value extract from Bitcoin. It is also signalling to miners that these transactions are not wanted.
But youβre wrong. Filters do nothing to stop βspam and crap.β
It clearly does, that's why they need it removed.
Well, yes that is the point. It must go into the mempool before it makes it into the block.
I can wait for the waiter to bring me out a surprise dish or I can order correctly from the menu.
I donβt want it anywhere not in my mempool and not on the blockchain.
You canβt stop it from getting into the blockchain. Thatβs the entire point. As much as you wanna virtue signal about it.
Knots nodes store all the exact same JPEGS.
Again you are looking at only the technical aspect, wrap your head around the bigger picture.
Yeah, blah blah but muh culture!!
I like the use of metaphors to explain point of view. Even if we don't have the same vision and don't agree.
nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzptjvza3qexe6qsfl6qvl6l5c8kjrkgypuutf40ktwajvxvafhll3qqsdmpqj35p8pwezq62z2e3eyeqkjk0xgx3dld6rgrakcvz3k8ch84gkuefwa
That is a BIG ask sir! Not everyone is capable to hear what you are saying vs what they think others have told them.
With the rise of Knots nodes, it seems most people understand. The reason they don't want to go directly to miners as the spam risks being orphaned in the future. It's going to be wonderful π
Correct. Things will get into the blockchain. That is fine and even warranted. I want these things and people to store anything that they want there.
I honestly think the jpeg idea is a good one. I would probably add one to the blockchain if I knew how, but it isnβt worth doing the research.
At this moment I want to keep the choice to configure my mempools on my devices. Others will configure their mempool however they want it so that they can have their transactions added to the mempool then blockchain.
I am ok with storing that.
I donβt have their use case, so my bitcoin knots nodes will be configured differently.
I guess what I havenβt said is that βI donβt think the op return being deleted as an option for the Bitcoin Core user to define is productive.β
Why do they want to take away an option that I want to use to configure my node?
umm signaling is how every conflict has been resolved in bitcoin so far
i don't think its the sledge you think it is
No, itβs isnβt.
The 2017 blocksize war was resolved with a fork, not useless signaling.
oh yes thats right the fork magically appeared out of nowhere
Cause they forked. Not just signaled.
The filterers are the ones pushing Libre Relay.
Bitcoin Core is moving to it you mean.
No, your logic is totally backwards.
If the mempool isnβt filtered, no one needs Libre Relay.
But if youβre artificially censoring valid transactions (aka Knots), THAT is what pushes people/miners to use Libre Relay.
nostr:npub100m0lzd74pgdnvk3s50eqcepnzptesr6guldm25hwu2a923uex0smrsyur
It is official⦠you are trolling. You once stated that there is no way to censor valid transactions and I agree. In this latest post you say that Knots is censoring.
You sir, Mr. Snuffleupagus are BUSTED! You really had me going for a minute there.
Censoring from the mempool, not blocks. Two totally different things, dumbass.
Let's try to keep this civil. A difference of opinion only, technically the Devs could be right, and maybe removing this code makes it simpler. But this was approached in the wrong way.
Thereβs no right way to approach something if plebs, no matter what, are going to act hysterical and claim Bitcoin Core is actively sabotaging bitcoin.
They did with Segwit no?
I donβt think Core βDevelopersβ specifically are sabotaging Bitcoin. I think they are coders that want to code and that is amazing!
They want to code for something that I donβt agree with. I donβt want Bitcoin code being change by anything if we can help it. I am worried about the consequences, not the act they are proposing.
Hilarious but true! I donβt wanna fight. I just repeated his words. He can fight himself. I wonder who will win??
Hey, flattery will get you everywhere with me. Itβs Mr. Dumbass to you. I can take a punch and a joke.
You actually may be right though. I am dumb about this. Do transactions in the mempool end up in blocks?
How do we change the block if not while it is in the mempool. This is a serious question. I may be dumb, but I donβt wanna get this wrong and be an ass also. Lol
First you and I are ultimately in agreement here but I think a less confusing metaphor would be
Itβs like going to a restaurant that can make anything as long as it follows food safety laws (consensus)
If youβre a miner, you literally have access to the kitchen and say over what gets made altogether- because you purchased the ingredients and run the show
Standardness on nodes is like the restaurant saying βwe have a menu because it makes our kitchen run smoothlyβ (but technically if you are the kitchen staff youβre not limited) as a customer you are limited but you could also put in a special order it just might get messed up or slow or expensive or something (out of band tx)
And if youβre running knots youβre saying βIβm gluten free- gluten anywhere near me will make me die please only serve me very gluten free foodβ but youβre in a restaraunt full of things made from flour so while they might say βthis is gluten freeβ itβs probably not
nice metaphor.
so you are dying.
And will survive only fat nodes that eat everything.
And the restaurant will just serve more fat and cheaper bad "food".
Until all customer live the restaurant or die because of diseases.
Is it the end of the restaurant that everyone want in the end ?
Exactly, no we really just want a restaurant that is honest that it is full of flour as it was intended to be by design
And if you like gluten free food, thereβs probably other options out there but this might not be it ya know
I do think the option of having the menu gives the people cosplaying a sense of βIβm eating gluten freeβ even though they are not during sync
It seems the original design was not exactly to have 1 restaurant but 2. One for junk foods and one for fresh cheap food. The fact is there is only 1 restaurant one day that serve both and have the aim to serve only junk food for more profitability. But not sure if customer don'y have any choice, the restaurant will stay open a long time.
Satoshi : "The networks need to have separate fates. BitDNS users might be completely liberal about adding any large data features since relatively few domain registrars are needed, while Bitcoin users might get increasingly tyrannical about limiting the size of the chain so it's easy for lots of users and small devices."
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1790.msg28696#msg28696
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1790.msg28917#msg28917
Sorry for my last "quick" answer with fault that i can't edit.
I get your point, and it is nice we talk about theses visions.
I agree with you on the honest part needed.
That's why all this "drama" (for m e it is more a vision of bitcoin future) is not useless.
Thanks for your help in that.
If βfull of flourβ means unlimited witness data, then I think the restaurant actually fucked up at some point and nobody has the balls to fix it.
Some flour (like maybe 400kb of flour) seems like a reasonable design choice that allows everything you can think of that needs to be made with flour.
The idiot(s) that said unlimited flour wouldnβt cause the restaurant to be filled with flour because nobody would ever in their right mind do thatβ¦ did not have enough of an adversarial mindset.
Thatβs not a bad analogy.
The only difference Iβd consider is that, even if you prefer to eat gluten-free, itβs better to know that youβre eating gluten, rather than live in ignorance.
I think mempool policy would be more like passing the menu around the table and letting people choose what to order. The knots people are like βIβm gluten free only get that menu away from meβ then proceed to throw the menu in the trash and not continue to pass the menu along. Or tear out the gluten sections of the menu then pass it along.
They also yell at the waiter π and the kitchen staff for working at the restaurant