Realized today that one of the reasons Pluribus is a fascinating mystery is the same reason Luke Dashjr is a fascinating character.

You see, neither the Pluribus nor Luke are capable of lying. Or at least, that's what they claim...

But when you delve deeper, you realize that they both perpetrate an incredible amount of deception, and they do so via what any normal person would call a "lie of omission."

As such, Pluribus is a captivating mystery show because you're constantly trying to figure out how the hive mind is being deceptive while still answering all of the questions from the protagonists honestly.

Absolutely adorable when folks try to tell me what I should say or how I should say it, because it might make some people think poorly of me.

Let me be clear: I shall say whatever I damn well please and my audience may think whatever they damn well please of me.

I'm not a politician and I am not seeking your approval.

I'm just happy we're finally back to arguing about actually interesting conundrums like quantum risks rather than retarded bullshit like spam. 😎

It's gonna be fun watching you fork off to a network that's only supported by the tiny portion of deranged puritans occupying the echo chamber you've built. 😏

Can't wait to see what happens when you batshit crazy puritans who understand jack shit about software development resort to running one of these vibe coded fork clients. 😉

could you explain briefly, what it does? did you need to sideload it?

Progress was made.

I think most Bitcoiners haven’t fully grokked how much work Gloria (and Greg Sanders and others) did to get package relay and zero-fee anchors and TRUC over the line and how absolutely critical this work is to Lightning, Ark, Spark, and nearly everything bitcoiners are going to be using over the next few years.

There's literally no activation client yet for 444 so it can't even actually be run and signaled yet. What does "it's happened" mean to you?

#knots

The OP_FALSE OP_IF structure being detectable is a fair. If it’s identifiable as unreachable code, then filtering it is more technically objective than I was framing it.

What happened with BSV and CSAM? I’m not familiar with that specific case but would like to understand the precedent you’re citing.

I can accept that technical arguments and CSAM concerns can both be valid. My issue is specifically with the emergency framing and pool boycott tactics, not with raising CSAM as a legitimate risk factor in the debate.

If the technical argument is strong enough on its own merits and the BSV precedent demonstrates real consequences, then the case should stand without the NOW NOW NOW urgency that bypasses careful consideration

The bowl and spoon don’t make it cereal. The ingredients do. You’re describing consumption, not definition.

According to your spam definition, who measures whether data storage is prioritized over value transfer? An inscription pays fees for block space. That IS value transfer to miners. If someone pays $50 for a dickbutt, they’re transferring $50 in value. You think it’s stupid. The economic transfer is real.

On existing filters, block size and script size are objective structural limits. They don’t judge transaction content or intent. This transaction is too big is measurable. This transaction has the wrong purpose requires human judgment.

Show me how to objectively measure data storage priority versus value transfer priority without judging intent. Priority is subjective. Bytes and fees are not.

Good try, but this is a category error. Fruit Loops has a definition. It’s a specific breakfast cereal made by Kellogg’s. Calling something else Fruit Loops when it’s literally soup would be false.

Spam isn’t a protocol property, it’s an opinion about use. This meme assumes there’s an objective definition of spam in Bitcoin. There isn’t. Show me the spam field in a transaction

Bitcoin being a money protocol, agreed. But the mechanism that makes it work as permissionless money is validation without requiring permission or judgment about transaction purpose. Once we start validating based on intended use rather than protocol rules, we’ve introduced a gatekeeper even if it’s decentralized.

Longstanding policy does shape Bitcoin’s identity, fair point. But there’s still a difference between policy that protects structure and policy that judges content. Script size limits are structural. Deciding what data is blob storage versus legitimate use requires interpretation.

You’re right that everyone has the right to advocate for their preferred implementation and try to win that argument socially. That’s legitimate. My pushback is specifically when that advocacy uses fear and emergency framing rather than technical merit. Preach Knots on its merits, fine. Use CSAM panic to force immediate action, that’s manipulation.

If Knots wins on technical arguments and social consensus, so be it. But let it win on merit, not manufactured urgency.

Yeah it seems very obvious watching it happen but there are a lot of people who are actually falling for it.

They’re ripe to be the next bcashers shaken out of their stacks by emotional manipulation and having their anxious tendencies weaponized.

Like you said, if ONE instance of CSAM would destroy Bitcoin then it’s been over for a long time and was always an exceptionally fragile system. Luckily that’s not the case at all.

Spam on chain has zero effect on my ability to use Bitcoin however I want. It doesn’t change the supply cap, its permission-less and censorship-resistance properties.

99.99999% of user have no clue there is spam on chain, they will never have a clue, and have no idea how to access it. I have no clue how to view spam on chain and I literally don’t care that it’s there. Means nothing to me.

If Core neglected to update spam filters and refuses to fix the vulnerability, that sounds like the Core development consensus chose not to restrict it. Whether through action or inaction, that became Bitcoin’s reality post Taproot.

On Satoshi’s filters: can you point to specific examples where Satoshi rejected transactions based on content type rather than structural validity? I want to understand the historical precedent you’re citing.

On Core 30 and Taproot: if they’re unrelated, what specifically is Core 30 changing that enables the threat you’re warning about?

On “each user decides” agreed. But there’s a difference between individual nodes filtering their own mempools versus advocating that filtering should be the standard. Your post isn’t just “here’s what I’m doing”, it’s “everyone should do this NOW.” That’s attempting to establish collective filtering as the norm, not individual choice.

in many UFO sightings, it is sometimes described that there is a "lava-like" plasma around the craft.

according to chatgpt:

> Plasma can act as a sort of “virtual aerodynamic surface,” allowing engineers to manipulate airflow without moving parts.

> Stealth potential: Some research suggests plasma could also reduce radar cross-section by absorbing or scattering electromagnetic waves.

apparently using plasma for these things is an active area of research. interesting...

Here is the probe. Maybe I am wrong but it looks like it is running knots even I just installed Core. I think it is very good to have option to run whatever but that looks very dishonest and manipulative, so nostr:nprofile1q9z8wue69uhnvmr9dp58jernwf6xsct8d45hxdn4w5m8gatrdej8v7nhxa3h2cnsw94ksanc09unw6n0d9hkxdp4d44hxu35v4skgtn0de5k7m30qy88wumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmv9uqzq44xkafh8j8hhy79809wsmv0lw46nu4pkwqjyp20ekml80mytde8phfu08 correct if I am wrong.

Maybe that's why the numbers look fake for nostr:nprofile1qythwumn8ghj7ct5d3shxtnwdaehgu3wd3skuep0qyt8wumn8ghj7etyv4hzumn0wd68ytnvv9hxgtcqyqsc8628tpyp6rcjf77e83tve2j9ulj5tnht34fgfrucy5l5j7uh2r2aejt

nostr:nprofile1qyt8wumn8ghj7etyv4hzumn0wd68ytnvv9hxgtcpzemhxue69uhks6tnwshxummnw3ezumrpdejz7qpq2rv5lskctqxxs2c8rf2zlzc7xx3qpvzs3w4etgemauy9thegr43sugh36r nostr:nprofile1qyxhwumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmvqyg8wumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytnhd9hx2qpq68gs509xmnunykrz90g43njwvm24pfkrs3fkaj4d7vhpvdqfhu0qjky9vw nostr:nprofile1qy88wumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmv9uq36amnwvaz7tmwdaehgu3wvf5hgcm0d9hx2u3wwdhkx6tpdshsqg905d960htecj7q06cc4660u0xxmrdjqyh2t8ka5u65dmjpr68f0cd64atr nostr:nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7erfw36x7tnsw43z7un9d3shjqgkwaehxw309ajkgetw9ehx7um5wghxcctwvshsqgramt9wusn8te56k0w4av6nujmuvrxpg8t97jj5vft7khx9y5zwsy24xdjk nostr:nprofile1qyt8wue69uhn2vfwxy6ngt3kxqhrjwf6xsurgwqpzemhxue69uhkjmnzdauzumn0wd68ytnhd9hx2qpqzpyse3g0hfq350g4akmwdl7v6xjavd8raaqm4slfc94y5twg0q4q0wwlfc nostr:nprofile1qyfhwue69uhnzv3h9cczuvpwxyargwpk8yq3wamnwvaz7tmpw3kxzuewdehhxarj9ekxzmny9uqzphf6j7gquvml60g0r42zy2zz7xey2en70jz30t86n6mpyn263hex2j6qrh nostr:nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7ct8vaezumn0wd68ytnvv9hxgqg4waehxw309a5xjum59ehx7um5wghxcctwvsqzpmnw5yatnljuff5w47d35d87q99xddqpzlzsac4xzn6vm22ekmn554fy54 nostr:nprofile1qy88wumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmv9uq37amnwvaz7tmwdaehgu3dwfjkccte9ejx2un9ddex7umn9ekk2tcqyqlhwrt96wnkf2w9edgr4cfruchvwkv26q6asdhz4qg08pm6w3djg3c8m4j nostr:nprofile1qyt8wumn8ghj7etyv4hzumn0wd68ytnvv9hxgtcpzemhxue69uhks6tnwshxummnw3ezumrpdejz7qpq2rv5lskctqxxs2c8rf2zlzc7xx3qpvzs3w4etgemauy9thegr43sugh36r nostr:nprofile1qyt8wue69uhh2mtzwfjkctnvda3kzmp6xsurgwqpz4mhxue69uhk2er9dchxummnw3ezumrpdejqqgxy3c5lqj6g9nqpeg0ea7xgdmurrrq9nc8fx5er2930pq8jdc2vzyu7yza6 nostr:nprofile1qyvhwue69uhkyat8d4skutndva6hjtnwv46r5dpcxsuqz9nhwden5te0vfjhgcfwdehhxarjd9kzucmpd5qzqxvfqd89dw8kqmrjfaz6zt8gfggcg93p4tm3s2slv4jrszuugfmt74rjkj

I wanted to ask a technical question 🙋‍♂️. Let’s say Bitcoin core fails and everyone runs Knots. What if someone creates an implementation of Core that was intentionally trying to be as bad of a node as possible. It opened OP_RETURN up, intentionally trying to spam CSAM, and Malware (haha maybe just Core 30). Say 100 people ran this implementation and had enough mining hash power to mine a few blocks full of the worst garbage you can think of. Wouldn’t the Bitcoin Network have this same problem that the ‘anti spam’ group is worried about. Is this inevitable to happen even if everyone who wants Bitcoin to succeed unites together?

#knots #antispam #bitcoinknots

It was confusing because the install button on Knots doesn’t appear until you uninstall Core. I barely know how to do anything on a node let alone UNinstall something. That’s brand new territory for me. Doing things with nodes is the most advanced computer shit that a lot of Bitcoiners will ever do especially when considering the financial implications of screwing up.

The problem is that the Knots screen needs to have an Install button whether or not Core is already running. If Core is already running, the Install button on Knots needs to still be present but it needs to be greyed out and inactive and next to it needs to be text that reads something like “to install Knots, uninstall Core by selecting Core, scrolling down to the Actions menu, and selecting Uninstall”.

That would be clean.

As much as i think inscriptions are retarded, this fact is just an economic reality.

Can I just run #bitcoin core 29.0.0 with my own settings and not be called a retard by both camps?

In the fork war nodes were being asked to store crazy amounts of data to facilitate the whole world using L1 cheaply in perpetuity.

In the spam war, nodes are being asked to relay as much data as possible for no benefit whatsoever.

We are not a serious project.

It kills me because at least during the fork war we all agreed on what bitcoin *was* - it was just a question of tradeoffs.

This war however is an effort to redefine Bitcoin entirely - as arbitrary data storage that can sort of do money as an additional cool feature.

Next step on my #BTC journey is running a node (#Knots). Any suggestion for a decent low maintenance machine I can configure with Knots please? 🥰

⚡️❌ READ - Many people think that XRP is a shitcoin.

At first glance, this seems to be the case, and any self-respecting person would stay as far away from this token as possible.

But it's only by studying it more seriously that we can get a better perspective on this token and understand just how much of a shitcoin it really is.

XRP isn't just another shitcoin. It's one of the worst shitcoins ever, despite being promoted as a "useful" and "revolutionary" technology.

So if you haven't done your own research (lack of time, lack of inclination ...), here are 10 reasons why you don't hate XRP enough:

1) The network is centralized (this is false decentralization):

Although anyone can become an XRP validator, validators' influence depends on their inclusion in the Unique Node Lists (UNLs), published by Ripple Labs itself and by entities with financial ties to the company.

This gives Ripple Labs de facto control over transaction validation and registry integrity.

And since Ripple Labs de facto controls the XRP registry, decentralization of the network is illusory.

The company can technically modify the system to freeze your funds at any time, or change the rules to create more tokens. In other words, Ripple Labs has final authority over the system. They could just as easily have used an SQL database.

Nobody needs a falsely decentralized system with a token controlled by a company.

In other words, the XRP token literally has no reason to exist.

2) Nobody uses XRP:

For over 10 years, the project has claimed to want to replace the SWIFT system, yet almost no banks use them.

Ripple Labs claims that its system is used by thousands of banks, when in reality it's more like a few dozen, the majority of which have probably been paid to install their system.

For example, MoneyGram has confirmed that it has received payments from Ripple to use #XRP , with reports indicating that Ripple has paid MoneyGram around $50 million over two years (2019-2020) as part of a "strategic partnership".

3) The XRP Ledger has also achieved the feat of being the only "decentralized" ledger to have lost its entire transaction history.

The first 32,569 blocks of the ledger have disappeared and cannot be verified.

Since the Ledger cannot be traced back to the root (the first initial transaction), there is no way for a newcomer to verify that the ledger is correct and has not been tampered with.

4) 100% of XRP tokens were pre-mined:

100 billion XRP tokens (100%) were created from scratch by Ripple, before the project was launched. The team simply pressed a button and reserved all the tokens for themselves (they were given to the creators and to Ripple as a reserve).

As we'll see below, Ripple Labs' business model is to dupe these tokens created from scratch onto small investors to make a profit.

Ironically, #Bitcoin solved the problem of creating money out of thin air in 2009. Those who understand this are buying #Bitcoin.

Shitcoins like XRP are attempts to build on Bitcoin's success by recreating the same problem that Bitcoin solved, and people have been fooled.

5) If you've been holding XRP instead of BTC, you've already lost 50% of your wealth since 2014.

And the loss would have been much greater than that if Ripple Labs didn't still own 50% of the tokens 😂

And yet, there are hundreds of influvolator clowns, even in 2025, who will tell you that XRP will go to $400 or $10000 per token (which is mathematically impossible).

The lack of understanding of the most basic mathematical rules makes you want to cry!

6) Ripple Labs is actively working to destabilize Bitcoin:

Ripple and its team have been one of the biggest sources of anti-Bitcoin misinformation for over 10 years, confusing Bitcoin newbies for years with false claims.

One of the co-founders even donated $5 million to Greanpeace USA to launch an anti-Bitcoin propaganda campaign aimed at "changing the code" of Bitcoin to proof of stake 😂

7) Their level of lobbying of politicians is mind-boggling:

Ripple's second strategy for driving up the XRP price is to get close to politicians, to actively promote public initiatives opposed to Bitcoin adoption and to try to get the USA to create a strategic XRP reserve.

In other words, trying to get the state (and therefore public money) involved in buying XRP so they can continue to dumper their shitcoin all over the country.

8) Ripple's actual business model? Dumper on investors:

Ripple Labs dumps billions of #

XRP created from scratch on the market at regular intervals, to fund its activities.

Brad Garlinghouse: "We would not be profitable or cash flow positive without selling our XRP holdings."

When executives explain their scam themselves, I think it's clear 😂

9) The creators themselves regularly dump their tokens:

Small investors are the exit liquidity for creators, who for years have been selling their XRP created from scratch; they have now become billionaires.

10) In short, XRP has been sold to you as a banking and technological revolution, but in reality, it's just a useless token, a centralized system with no real purpose, that hasn't accomplished anything in a decade.

XRP is one of the worst things the cryptocurrency market has produced (and that's saying something!). It's a slow scam in which you are the exit liquidity.

🗣️ Buy Bitcoin!

If somebody wants to run a node but it's not currently financially viable to them.

Contact me, I'd be happy to help out a new bitcoin knots runner.

Are you concerned of Luke being the sole maintainer?