45
Obaid Aldadi
459c2642e1c3cc1c4ead86dbae3b791c12d79b0733bc29f5e5b67e591771c0eb

Beautifully said, other than the moon landing thing which I'm still skiptical about.

It's so unfortunate that people that brought forth human flourishing, people who still care, who are curious and thoughtful are still around, but are too busy chasing bread to bring forth anything meaningful.

Inflation is a horrindos crime that set our species back into the dark ages. Bitcoin cannot fail.. We should not regress no more... It's such a heart wrenching waste.

There is no slope, we're already there. I ran a cheap Raspberry pie node in 2022. That same node is bricked and is obselete. I will not wait until my Start9 node becomes obselete too, running knots.

Excuse the guy for speaking up about an existential threat for the very thing he's using to save for his future and the future of his family. Pay attention, this op_limit issue can make it too expensive for normal people to run nodes. Without these nodes bitcoin is no longer decentralized, and it can be co-opted to become a proof of stake network - change the code - that no longer serves you and protect your purchasing power.

They no longer work due to the inscriptions hack and the utxo set bloat. Stronger more expensive node software is required to run nodes now. Imagine how difficult and expensive it will be when the op_return limit is lifted. Plebs will no longer afford running nodes similar to etheriom and other shit coins. Last thing we want is to become proof of stake or fiat, but that's what will happen if we give up on running our own nodes.

It does have an effect on our ability to run nodes. We used to be able to use cheap raspberry pie to run nodes, they no longer work because of the spam on the network bloating the utxo set. Now we must purchase more expensive node hardware to run it.

Next up blow open the op_return data carrier limit.. And we will have to purchase even stronger node hardware or become obselete. Bitcoin essentially becomes impossible to verify and defend by the plebs. We leave node running to corpprations and miners who care only about short term profits. Byebye to the 21millions cap eventually, and we're back to the fiat system, bitcoin is dead.

Replying to Avatar jb55

android

💯💯💯💯💯

nostr:nprofile1qqsggcc8dz9qnmq399n7kp2yu79fazxy3ag8ztpea4y3lu4klgqe46qpzamhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgtcpzdmhxue69uhhqatjwpkx2urpvuhx2ue0qy28wumn8ghj7un9d3shjctzd3jjummjvuhs8fa6r0 interested?

Replying to Avatar Tauri

👀

Bitcoin isn’t as alien to history as people like to imagine. Strip away the tech, and what you’ve got is a very old story: a distributed base of power resisting central authorities that try to tighten their grip. The novelty is that Bitcoin encodes this struggle in math and software rather than flesh and law.

A few parallels:

• The Reformation (16th c.) – The Catholic Church was the “Core devs”: centralized, with a monopoly on defining truth. Luther and the printing press were the “Knots nodes”: suddenly ordinary believers could circulate pamphlets and enforce their own interpretations. The Church fought back, splintered, lost dominance, but didn’t disappear. Bitcoin has the same “printing press moment” baked in: you can fork the code, and if enough people run it, the cathedral loses ground.

• The English Civil War / Glorious Revolution (17th c.) – Monarchs claimed divine right (analogous to Core’s “we are the maintainers”). Parliament and local militias said: “we’ll run our own system, thanks.” Through messy conflict and power shifts, sovereignty was redistributed. Bitcoin nodes mirror that: they don’t just protest—they enforce.

• The American Revolution (18th c.) – Colonists rejected imperial overreach, even though Britain had the stronger navy, money, and bureaucracy. Decentralized militias and colonies coordinated to resist taxation and rule-making. The UASF in 2017 was the Boston Tea Party of Bitcoin: no taxation without representation, no blocksize increase without node consensus.

The difference is Bitcoin doesn’t rely on bullets or pamphlets but on incentives and hashpower. Yet the dynamics rhyme: concentrated authority always tries to centralize; distributed actors always push back; the outcome is never the total triumph of either, but a rough equilibrium.

You’re right that history tilts toward authorities winning—they have armies, money, bureaucracy. But Bitcoin bends the game because here the “army” (miners) can’t overrule the villagers (nodes) if the villagers coordinate on the rules of entry. The software removes the usual weapons of coercion.

This note deserves its own video nostr:nprofile1qqsggcc8dz9qnmq399n7kp2yu79fazxy3ag8ztpea4y3lu4klgqe46qpzamhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgtcpzdmhxue69uhhqatjwpkx2urpvuhx2ue0qy28wumn8ghj7un9d3shjctzd3jjummjvuhs8fa6r0!

Patience and wisdom, strategic thinking, capital accumulation, basic intelligence, survival of the fittest 🤔

Our entire civilization exists and keeps progressing because of this concept.

Replying to Avatar corndalorian

Is our wait finally over? 🤣

They do in my country, glass bottles but completely wrapped for some reason 🤔

GM!

Are you concerned at all with the bitcoin core devs refusing to implement spam filters? Shouldn't we be sounding the alarm and switching to knots or other implementations?

Are you concerned at all with the bitcoin core devs refusing to implement spam filters? Shouldn't we be sounding the alarm and switching to knots or other implementations?