sqlite is good in general.
can even do sqlite sharding.
ViaBTC is a good pool
i started to feel they use woketards as reverse psychology. they created a group so degenerate, so hated, that nobody wants to agree with them. so by using the easily influenced woketards, they influence you.
at this point everything going wrong with the civilization explains the coretard behavior:
people dont want to bite the hand that feeds them OR might possibly feed them in the future.
bro i like it when i make a tx and a block includes in 1 minute.
gn
bitcoin node stuff is just my priority after work stuff.
yes i might make some small stuff time to time.
but if im not focusing on the work project, then i work on the bitcoin node project.
it just work stuff never ends. hopefully more relaxed times will come if we can push through this version.
then i can continue working and experimenting on the bitcoin node stuff.
just a prototype not really a game.
reason why i have been remaking it since the first time i started coding.
started with unity, then i was just using unity ecs and low level graphics api of unity, then most recently i have been trying to make it with my own engine, an ecs library, and webgpu graphics api.
i have videos of the old unity one: https://www.youtube.com/@shibasitch
currently im using my own engine with this ecs library: https://friflo.gitbook.io/friflo.engine.ecs
but might change to this one as well: https://github.com/Felid-Force-Studios/StaticEcs
using webgpu for the graphics api, because its not outdated like opengl, and not as complex as using vulcan directly.
videos are with my old laptop
just a prototype not really a game.
reason why i have been remaking it since the first time i started coding.
started with unity, then i was just using unity ecs and low level graphics api of unity, then most recently i have been trying to make it with my own engine, an ecs library, and webgpu graphics api.
i have videos of the old unity one: https://www.youtube.com/@shibasitch
currently im using my own engine with this ecs library: https://friflo.gitbook.io/friflo.engine.ecs
but might change to this one as well: https://github.com/Felid-Force-Studios/StaticEcs
using webgpu for the graphics api, because its not outdated like opengl, and not as complex as using vulcan directly.
scenery like these, makes me wanna continue working on my "space game" and learn more about world generation and experiment. etc.
fun fact.
i didnt realize today was the new year day.
there was fireworks outside, so i was like "what is happening".
then realized...
i thought in my mind there was like 2-3 more days until.
didn't realize. (first time in my life)
you can become a listening node over tor or i2p easily. you dont necessarily have to open a port on your router. it even works for mobile devices. for example i run a node on my phone. if i didn't have storage issue, i would be able to run it as a full node.
lightning is not the only thing that scsles bitcoin payments.
we need every device to have a hybrid node that starts as light client and downloads data on demand but also slowly becomes a full node in the background.
self custodian lightning can't scale alone, but things like ark, might be interesting.
i think there are places where we can optimize the storage in a bitcoin client, which might make things better.
better ux is important too. install the app and it slowly becomes a listening full node.
i think once we have a good client/node like that adopted, we can add for a new network communication protocol that can work alongside with the legacy raw tpc protocol. it can run on http and websockets. which makes browsers nodes easier to implement as well.
node running should be available to everyone, people don't have to worry about storage.
layer 1 is something global everyone has to sync with 1:1. so keeping layer 1 small is the MOST important thing. it should trump every other idea.
i can't run a full node on my laptop. i have to use my old pc for it, or buy an another hardware. not really normie friendly.
only reason we need a timechain in the first place is preventing double spending. so it should do that, as a final signaling layer, a 10 minute heartbeat verify the order of things. and everything should be built around the constraint that we keep it as small as possible.
computing part is temporary initial hurdle, but you always feel the storage limits. you can't temporarily free your storage. if it bigger than an AAA game, its an issue.
full node target device should be your phone. and yes i agree on that processing also an issue, but its only temporary issue during the initial sync for the most part, bigger issue is the storage limit.
if im installing the bitcoin node on a friend's laptop, i always have to turn on pruning, but with pruning on, its mostly useless. so storage is a bigger issue.
they can download the chain verify it, but can't keep the whole data without buying additional hardware.
not to mention how we don't really have a good all in one software/app yet. that prioritizes normal people running useful full nodes.
fuck aliens
HUMAN SUPREMACY
what a year
but when you look at the fundamentals of the protocol. monero is not better.
and if it scales destined to be less decentralized because of the fact that it would take more disk space and processing power to run it.
many dont realize it but bitcoin has a disk storage issue even with its block size limit. 800gb is way too much.
and monero doesn't fix that, makes it worse.
how does thay make monero better
Monero does not have a limited supply and there is no guarantee that there is no hidden inflation, so it is not suitable for long-term savings.
In any case, Monero is a privacy tool and is not perfect either.
nostr:nevent1qqsgkjs320fmwja39y5pr9jv677vqpaw6x9mvgv03872c4lr0p78xws9nmumw
an it doesn't stay decentralized when scaled.
i hate nostr apps that ask for signing permissions while being idle.
wtf do you need to sign this random base64 for? why should sign anything blindly.
if im not publishing anything, then you shouldn't ask me to sign things.
if you are for some reasons talking to your own server and need authentication, just create your own token. let me sign the public key you generate for the communication.
im not randomly saying accept anything you say, idk if you are publishing it on relays or not, what does that weird kind number mean. do i have to check online every time?
its simple, of you are not publishing anything on the relays, then dont fucking require me to sign anything...
if im not pressing on something, don't fucking try to sign spam shit.... like decrypting chat. have a fucking decrypt button...
works?
lpotq6xt6tju5cedioi2qfi3prc2p7hdrimz2jyu4r35hk5g2gwq.b32.i2p
my nostr relay running on my phone.
Tor receives significant funding from US government and other governments.
It is centralized (9 directory nodes) and still used for privacy. 
Directory nodes: https://consensus-health.torproject.org/
idc about tor privacy.
onion addresses are cool. i like onion address, being able host/connect anything from anywhere.
THE Goal is to create a strong bloodline that can fight with demons.
Rug The Spammers
send it to an OP_RETURN
gone forever.
GM
you dont have to, there isn't many financially viable ways to store blob data on bitcoin.
nostr:nprofile1qqsv2g4wyh4fgdf85qlqk82yflkarlw3uun0vswlqjzu2mqqejd0qzcys3wz3 04678afdb0fe5548271967f1a67130b7105cd6a828e03909a67962e0ea1f61deb649f6bc3f4cef38c4f35504e51ec112de5c384df7ba0b8d578a4c702b6bf11d5f
nostr:nprofile1qqsv2g4wyh4fgdf85qlqk82yflkarlw3uun0vswlqjzu2mqqejd0qzcys3wz3 sp1qqwdknqgz7v2ph8hxjc9t2nz3frqazjkhu7c5ar5w03tn0amw3ugrsq5zmaznxjuce70l6p47t5vm25qngxnwqgk025csgr735uds0y9wsgjkuhfc
just search "BSV CSAM" on any search engine. it was a mess and node runners had to make their own client with filters. and invent pruning methods.
there is a rush because v30 comes out this week.
also you can watch videos of the "Bitcoin University" on YT , he aggregates many information in his videos. he has hours of content on it (probably, didnt count).
there is also a video of BitcoinMechanic called "Bitcoin OG and Legend Jason Hughes Explains the Damage Of 100KB OP_RETURN".
some old post from satoshi:
https://nostr.download/c9c2c3ec58e1d16d1e7662fad6bb46631fdbcbd7e7ac9433abfed1cd1c1c350d.webp
OP_FALSE OP_IF and its variants are structure. if it wasnt a structure we would be able to filter it. we would had need machine learning to filter it. any IDE can detect unreachable code.
and BSV already did the exact same change. and we saw what happened. its not panic, if its real. also its not like people on the knots side doesnt make any technical arguments, there are many technical arguments made by knots side (its just there is also left side of the bell curve).
you can make technical arguments and also point out things like CSAM vulnerability at he same time. two things can exists and be true at the same time.
and CSAM is also a technically a valid concern based on history, what happened to BSV.
> On the exploit framing, I understand the analogy to using YouTube for storage or a bank database for encoding data. But there’s a key difference. Those are private platforms with terms of service. Bitcoin is a permissionless protocol. The question isn’t whether inscriptions are the intended use, but whether Bitcoin can remain permissionless while enforcing intended use.
bitcoin is a money protocol, break any other use case is not against the protocol. and again bitcoin doesnt live on the ether, in runs on people's devices. bitcoin is permissionless money.
> Now on consensus versus policy, you’re right that policy allows parallel rules without chain splits. That’s valuable. But when the debate becomes not just what policy individuals choose, but what policy should be standard or what pools should be boycotted for not filtering, we’ve moved from free market policy to prescriptive policy.
many policy has been part of the bitcoin for a very long time. they are part of what bitcoin is. only reason they are not consensus is just in case, so we dont accidentally trap ourselves. these are yes mostly standard. and many has the purpose of mitigating the blob data storage usage from the early satoshi days.
> Your vision of a free market of network policy with custom filter scripts and plugins is actually more aligned with permissionless principles than mandating everyone filter the same way. Let nodes compete, let fee markets work, let the best approach win.
exactly knots go up, and everyone has right to believe other implementation is shit, and go do wars on it. everyone has right to preach knots, and teach others why its the best option we have. its social. and because technically core arguments makes no sense, if people think longer than 10 mins.
> Filtering based on structural limits is objective. Filtering based on whether data belongs here requires ongoing human judgment about what’s legitimate Bitcoin use.
that's why filters are dynamic. i would go further and say that we need isolated custom filter scripts and plugins. free market of network policy.
for example i can make a plugin that delays the propagation of blocks by weight of the txs that doesnt fit into my filtering policy. simulating a slow connection. making it more likely to be a stale block.
> On Taproot: if policy prevented inscriptions before and Taproot removed that barrier, then the Bitcoin community achieved consensus to expand what’s allowed. Calling it an exploit now is reframing a consensus change as a bug.
that's why i used to phrase "excuse", the goal of size limit policy being removed had nothing to do with that use case. its a side effect of poor decision making, and lack of attention on the codebase by normal plebs as i said "changing the multiplier of gravity will have untended side effects". and script size limit was a policy, not a consensus.
> On the money argument: inscriptions are paying full freight in fees. They’re expensive. If someone wants to pay $50 to inscribe data, they’re not attacking the fee market, they’re participating in it.
> The timechain isn’t storage by design, agreed. But fee markets should make storage economically prohibitive, not developer policy deciding what counts as storage versus payment.
its called an exploit, because its an exploit. if i start using your nostr relay to spam chunks of a blob data as posts, then im exploiting your relay. if i use my bank's transaction history to encode and store random blob data, then im exploiting their database. if i use youtube as cloud storage by encoding blob data into videos, thumbnails and video title and descriptions, then im exploiting the youtube.
they are attacking because script space is not intended as storage space.
talking about some policy like "objective" or "subjective" is miss-leading as well. policy is policy. if consensus said "max script size is x, and max op_return size is y, or tx size has to be idk an odd number". then you wouldn't be able to make the same argument. because consensus is consensus.
with consensus, if you disagree, you either have to split and lose or accept what the majority says. in consensus "yes" and "no" can't exists together on the same chain. in policy you dont have to split, you can add any rules you want as long as you are staying inside the frame of consensus. different policy rules can exists in parallel in the free market of network policy.
its free speech, just like i can choose what to gossip with others physically, i can choose what to gossip with other nodes around me.
in a community culture might not be a written rule, but it protects it. and lack of it would ruin it.
> Where does content filtering stop once we accept it as legitimate?
blob data on the timechain is not legitimate. there is no category. its simple.
there aren't many financially viable ways to store blob data on the chain. if we filter some as they get popular, eventually there will be no p2p way to store blob data. unless core creates another opening again. but until then hopefully core will be irrelevant in the free market node software.
if they can have tools to decode it, then you can filter it.
policy exists not because they are less important than consensus, but because its more beneficial for them to be dynamic. because we dont wanna lock ourselves in.
and also i believe having more dynamic options between nodes keeps the protocol more decentralized.
if we suddenly have a ceo of bitcoin (core maintainer) changing what its, is it still bitcoin? you cant just change playing field and expect everything to keep working. if you change the multiplier of gravity you would break many things.
if you remove all of the policy, its not the same bitcoin anymore.
and tapscript didn't exist while satoshi was active.
also there was nothing stopping inscriptions from being existed before taproot, except the script size limit policy for witness. which was also removed for tabscript with the taproot fork. so policy has stopped exploits like these many times before. until its removed for another excuse.
because of policy vitalik left bitcoin and built the ethereum shitshow. let them build their own country, because they are not welcomed fucking with people's money.
bitcoin doesnt run on the ether, it runs on people's devices, that what makes it different and decentralized. and just like in any protocol you have to filter spam, exploits of protocol, and other attacks.
timechain is not a storage. it exists to prevent double spend. if we had another solution, it wouldn't have existed.
or they are just woke or semi-woke. saying phrases like "all bytes equal".
good video btw
numbers are correct, but they add a big customs fee. and only way im profitable in btc is if i borrow usd against my bitcoin. gonna buy one first to test what happens in the customs. then gonna buy 3 more maybe.
my guess is someone was running a bunch of core nodes to bump the counts up, because it was hardly going down, staying flat.
so before turning them off, they also ran bunch of knots nodes as well. so they can pull them out at the same time as the core. nodes.
so its not like bunch of core nodes disappearing at the same time, but bunch of core and knots node disappearing at the same time.
but in reality, knots went up to 20%,
core went down from 20k nodes to 16k nodes