Disappointed about the discourse on OP_RETURN. Lots of fear-mongering, conspiratorial thinking, and stirring up emotions. The loudest people don't want to focus on the technicals. Some influencers say it's not a technical question, it's about some sort of culture or whatever the fuck they're LARPing. Those are the most insincere and manipulative voices.
Demand a rational explanation. Don't be fooled by emotions.
Moved to Knots, donโt want spam in my node.
Are you on a different chain or how do you not have the exact same Blockchain as everyone else?
I donโt like how Core handles PRs and the surrounding discussion. Bitcoin is a monetary network - if you want to experiment, do it on Layer 2 just as you do. Iโll continue verifying what I consider spam with my node a bit longer, hoping it slows down block propagation and increases the chance of those blocks becoming orphans. Maybe then miners will start building templates that align more closely with my policy preferences.
As node runners we decide what's in our local mempool.
Miners decide what's in the global Blockchain.
check this discussion and try understand more about that spam.
btw> you already store some spam on your node.
Well, nothing new here. Bitcoin Mechanics summed this one up perfectly. โSpam filters are non effective on node level so just give up and bust that stuff wide openโ. Thieves and murderers are unstoppable so we should just lift a policy to make it punishable crime and let them do whatever they want.
one thing I do not like about DevBrain is the ever-increasing chasm between reality and the thing in the computer.
Bitcoin would quite literally not exist without a concentrated desire to challenge the banking establishment, which skews heavily toward globalist politics.
this isn't conspiratorial thinking, it is REALITY.
be afraid of reality or confront it.
either way, nobody is asking you to run Bitcoin.
What are the technicals? Can't say I've heard a real technical argument from either side.
I'm not deep into this debate at all but from the outside it sure looks like a Coke versus Pepsi thing.
It's like if Coke said "We want to allow each bottler to be able to add as much high fructose corn syrup as they want. They can make it 100%, and that's just fine." And Pepsi said "That's a bad idea we'll stick with the current limit according to our recipe." Which would you rather drink?
Yeah right ! We are all wrong.
The public relations about this from core has been pathetic.
I figure I'm on the high end of competence for a non Dev. I read inventing Bitcoin and Mastering Bitcoin cover to cover. I read technical documents constantly as part of my job. I still took a week to get my head right about it.
The greatest communicators make complex topics simple. They made a simple issue complex by being obtuse and condescending.
TLDR - if the devs don't want regular people to get mad about non issues they need to come out of their mother's basements and practice talking to non devs once in a while.
So the solution is to censure these voices ? or speak louder than them ?
I agree we need technicals light.
But i think the debate need to be public, it is important, for the node, miners, devs, users... anyone that can be concern by BTC.
For important subject there will always be noise and truth, everyone have to dig in it to find the truth.
It seems it is a so important subject that some people are hating each other a lot because of this (even if bitcoin will not disappear because of any final decision around this OP_RETURN problem).
for me it is just a "long term" problem as nakamoto said :
nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzq40rg0n93yrn6vf0e2esqa0yk35px6dk23v7lum20ch7f7yq4ngmqqswr7sla434duatjp4m89grvs3zanxug05pzj04asxmv4rngvyv04sws3ew4
And the conclusion will just be defined by usage :
nevent1qqspcd63h8xjjwnujujjxdecpfv0l4upj8uqv4nqstl2tk9dy9qwmgcatzhnx
No miners is more important than node, no node is more important than dev, no dev is more important than miners... they all need each others.
And it is normal they all have a voice, even the users. It is just a sane big noise discuss. ๐
In your mind, what is the goal of this change? The change may be technical, but the goal or outcome should not be. Can you help me understand that?
I'm mid discussion on this hammering out the final details of what I learned, then I'm going to post the ELI5 the devs should have been writing when they were sneaking a large op_return in the back door and calling everyone idiots for not understanding something they never clearly explained.
Just checked your feed for the entire length of the controversy.
A few smartass remarks.
0 helpful explanations.
Maybe be the change you want to see in the world?
there is also that
I dont know what you expected after seeing the previous soft fork discussions
the average iq justgets lower
Since I started following my manager's new trading plan, I've seen a significant improvement in my financial situation. I'm truly grateful for the support I'm receivingโearning $150,000 as a beginner in crypto trading is a huge milestone. If you're looking to get started, I highly recommend reaching out to Mrs. Susan. You can contact her via email at susandemorirs@gmail.com or on WhatsApp at +1 (472) 218-4301
Objectively removing this filter will allow more spam on chain, more cheaply and easily than the same transaction would cost through private mempools or paying third parties..
Subjectively, people are arguing other forms of spam are worse SO we should incentivise spammers to use this form of spam.
"The technicals" for me would be core should be increasing the number of filters to cover other types of spam rather than allowing spam altogether because "some types of spam would be less destructive" as Core is proposing. The solutions being proposed are a bad idea, and there has been actual "conspiring" amongst core devs to suppress dissent, which is why you're seeing "conspiracy theories".
From looking at your posts on the topic, your "technicals" are probably a different take than mine, and this "loudest people" argument is actually just you loudly disagreeing.
What if thereโs no such thing as spam in a free market? If retards want to pay to post JPEGs, let them. Eventually they run out of money and all they accomplished was stimulating miners to secure the network harder. Fees are the bottleneck for spam already. Storage capacity gains will outpace their ability to make poor financial decisions
You need explanation and here it is.
The same spam that needs to be filterted on Nostr is gladly accepted on Bitcoin. Not good.
im disappointed in core devs handling of the situation
in the world of professional services, there are two levels of 'conflicts of interest' you always have to watch for
- actual conflicts of interest, and
- potential / perceived conflicts of interest
i think the same applies in this case. if you want to keep being seen as independent and impartial you have to consider both
so id check first , before dismissing people with some ivory tower bullshit that this merely a technical issue, maybe, just maybe, people have a valid concern about potential conflicts of interest
Discussions about โฟ are only good. And it's up to everyone to have their own idea! Not only the technicians have the truth in their pockets for the future of the protocol. Even non-technicals can be forward-looking on some things. Sometimes even more than the technicians themselves ๐คทโโ๏ธ
if it were to be debated purely on the technicals then shoukd have done better job managing the perceived conflicts of finterest
core have massive black mark against them now and its such a shame
And then there's still people who claim they haven't seen any technical arguments of this change. Sure, if you refuse to read.
