Avatar
George Vaccaro
4d62bde56cdc5bf8940e5427592b46d643b46f1907ba4b198d06c7c14e0052f4
Created the first Lightning Network static QR code and Lightning Payable Arcade Machine. Creator of the Magical Crypto Friends Arcade Machine

It's hard to manage changes, updates, security patches etc. on a 24/7 decentralized monetary network. Litecoin was used during the block size wars to help test LN and it's required changes. Your point is not wrong, but it's no trivial task.

My advice is to try to stay calm and not assume long time contributors to bitcoin are bad actors. Don't trust, verify - yes, but that doesn't mean to assume any change is a conspiracy.

We can run any node software we want and shouldn't be assumed to be bad actors. Choice is good and multiple implementations is positive. I think we just need to stop short of confidently assigning negative motivations to people who have been doing amazing work for years.

Open and respectful discussion between people who understand all these dynamics is what's needed. Not emotional libelous flame wars.

A 26 TB disk costs $550 USD. Disk space is the least of the concerns. Do more research into the topic. It has more to do with game theory, incentives amd the ability to control the data on your node.

Imo both sides have valid perspectives but somehow this has devolved into flame wars rather than what should be a respectful dialog. Novices jumping down the throats of long time devs with low resolution takes and accusations is most definitely not helping.

You just instantly devolved a technical discussion into comments on personal appearance. Probably time to take a break and ensure your opinion is more than an emotional response and is actually based in reality.

If you bring insults instead of arguments you are not helping.

How exactly would that be done ("pushing the changes into 29")? If you can't explain how or have not done the research on whether that's even possible, now would be a good time to reflect on the possibility you might be propagandized and are reacting emotionally to a difference of opinion and approach to very complex technical matters.

You owe to yourself and your followers to at least do some basic research before spreading more hysteria. We need more rational voices, not inflamation and vilificiation.

Apparently, and unfortunately, it looks like many of your nostr followers have gone bitcoin woke, mustering mostly emotional reactions and reciting spoon-fed narratives. Im seeing this everywhere, unfortunately.

I'd love to see a thoughtful discussion between you and Samson about the topic. Might help bridge the divide.

Or maybe Samson and Greg since they have had a working relationship dating back ages (a decade iirc).

This whole thing reminds me a bit of the block size wars. Many getting caught up in emotional and irrational vilification and even hysteria instead of thoughtful and respectful discussion over differences of opinion on complex technical matters including game theory, which is likely too complex for most (including me) to wrap their heads around.

There also seems to be a fair amount of confusion over default settings vs. removed options. I'd think at the least such a discussion could clear some of that up.

My 2c fwiw.

Just a 4x to $.5 million!

Bitcoin did a 16x from Jan 1, 2017 before the end of that year. HODL!

Blowing away all our collective expectations. What a time line!

That's not the whole story. As I understand it, you will still relay spam, just in a way that is more costly to node runners since it stays in the UTXO set. Imo both sides have reasonable technical and governance perspectives but some "in the community" are turning this into a political battle, slandering the other side, as you just did. Ironically, the people trying to frame this as "core is evil/stupid/corrupt/shitcoiners" may be more likely to be shitcoiners trying to fracture the community of the top dog. It's simply a philisophical difference of opinion on how to deal with spam.

Just my opinion.

It's too bad Rick Falkvinge became a BCH stooge posting B.S. big block FUD on reddit.

Wikileaks freeze, Operation ChokePoint 1 and 2, Canadian truckers donations freezes, banking "compliance", anyone?

I appreciate the possible reasons for the diplomatic framing but we are not children so should acknowledge the abuses of monetary controls and surveillance even in "privileged" countries.

Coining some new terms this morning.

"Nocoiner fallacy": a most severe form of sunk costs fallacy regarding the series of cascading and stubbornly repeated decisions to completely deny one's own portfolio from benefitting from Bitcoin despite its historic ascent.

And the most severe form:

"Peter Schiff Syndrome" (PSS), is based on a similar underlying thought credited to Upton Sinclair - "You'll never get a man to admit a competing product is superior to one that his livelihood depends on" which is somewhat universal. In this particular case this extension can be added "even when the competing product is extremely or arguably more aligned with his stated core principles".

Everyone gets the price they deserve.

https://helpfulprofessor.com/sunk-costs-examples/

https://quoteinvestigator.com/2017/11/30/salary/

Great to see you embracing the chaos of these seemingly infinitely curious and joyous little people. They really motivate us and put life into proper perspective: seeing the world with fresh eyes, embracing experiences, living in the moment and valuing the most precious and rare time. Early childhood is so brief and amazing, will pass you by before you know it and when it's gone you'll miss it. It's heartwarming and heartbreaking at the same time. The silver lining is that you're helping shape the person that likely loves you the most and that depth will grow and change in interesting and challenging ways. Looking back it's hard to imagine almost missing the opportunity altogether. It might have been the most significant chapter of life left completely unwritten. I'm just so thankful that it was.

To push shitcoins using the same/similar leftover/recycled narratives from 2017. There are 15+million and growing shitcoins all with a reason to target the single most dominant and original "crypto" with FUD. Different day, same story. The crypto space is quickly becoming an idiocracy. Thankfully tried and true Bitcoiners are still shepherding it carefully despite all these obvious scammers and low information dis/malcontents.

Replying to Avatar Jameson Lopp

Greg Maxwell's take:

There isn't anything unusual or bad going on *with* Bitcoin Core.

In my opinion there does appear to be a dishonest and inauthentic social media campaign *against* Bitcon Core. There have been a dozen threads on reddit on the matter, which is pretty sad because it's mostly a nothing burger... I've wasted tens of hours writing responses only to find that generally the opponents just vanish.

Back in 2014 the average block size was only around 160 kilobytes, as a result there was no real pressure to drive up transaction fees and it was extremely cheap to stuff whatever garbage data you wanted in Bitcoin's chain. Some people were storing data by paying to fake addresses which were really just data instead of an address. This is maximally bad because it bloats up the UTXO database with unprunable data, directly increasing the minimum cost to run a node.

To address this core devs introduced a 'data carrier' output type also called an OP_RETURN. This is a kind of output which provably can't be spent so it doesn't have to go into the utxo database and can be pruned. Additionally, they limited the size of the data to 40 bytes in order to encourage applications which can just store a hash instead of the data to do that. Later this limit was increased to 80 bytes.

The world has changed a lot since 2014: Fees are now not just meaningful but significant, no one is dumping data in Bitcoin because it's *cheap*. People dumping data in have almost entirely moved to dumping data in the witness portion of transactions. Major miners no longer enforce this limit, because it turns out they like money (and have denied requests to limit themselves), and if you are willing to directly connect to one its easy to get them mined. There are some users who are still creating 'fake outputs' but have said they would change to opreturn if not for the limit (particularly some payment channel thing). Finally, use of hashes for commitments is now well understood and there are over 2 commitments per second flowing into open-timestamps which can aggregate an unlimited number of commitments into a single transaction.

The limit also causes some harm to all users of Bitcoin, particularly since multiple significant miners ignore it. When you don't already know a transaction (because it never reached you or you discarded it) it takes *much* longer to relay a block to you (at least 3x the delay if you knew everything but potentially much more depending on how much data you are missing), this harms small miners at the expense of big miners increasing a centralization pressure on mining (because when miners aren't on the same chaintip, one one bigger miners are on will tend to win). It also contributes to mining centralization by encouraging direct transaction submission since no one will bother submitting to a 1% miner, allowing the bigger miners to make more money. An inaccurate mempool also harms users ability to accurately estimate what transactions are pending for the next block so that they can optimally bid against them.

So it was proposed that the limit be removed. There are two proposals, one that just removes the limit completely, which is the first and simpler proposal. Then there is another proposal which makes the default unlimited but retains the ability to adjust it. At this time neither of the proposals have been merged, descriptions of this as having been done are just untruthful.

Arguments against it don't seem to hold up.

The first category of opposition is basically just accusing Bitcoin Core devs of being in favor of shitcoins or monkey jpegs, having talked to many I am confident that few or even none of them like that stuff (no one I've talked to was in favor of it). But no matter how much they don't like that stuff, that doesn't change that this proposal should have no significant effect on it-- it's unrelated. That stuff doesn't use opreturn today and would cost more in transaction fees if it did.

The next category of opposition is just general opposition to 'spam'-- again this proposal is largely unrelated because spammers won't use this, and to whatever extent they do it'll be good news (either moving from utxo bloating fake outputs or increasing their costs). It's an incidious argument because most contributors to Bitcoin core believe there isn't much meaningfully more that can be done about spam: Miners have bypassed the filters that were there, fees have excluded all price sensitive spam. Bitcoin was designed to be censorship resistant and depends on censorship resistance to work-- and a fact of free speech is that it means it allows both speech you like and speech you oppose. Arguments are made that blocking this traffic isn't morally equivalent to censorship. Perhaps! but it's still substantially *technically* equivalent. But, again, this is all a distraction in that the proposed change shouldn't meaningfully facilitate any new spam.

Ultimately the subject is deep in the minutia. It won't make a difference to your usage of Bitcoin. The only really concerning thing I see in the subject is the degree that people have successfully weaponized misinformation to direct a lot of entirely undeserved abuse at contributors to Bitcoin Core. ... who had only just started discussing a proposal when they were waylaid by a flood of disproportionate comments and falsehoods.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/s/elIDdPaQhL

Jameson with the sane perspective. Thank you for lending your time and intelligence to clarify the situation.

It's become clear to me recently that we are at new heights of uninformed yet authoritatively presented shit talking on the bitcoin subreddit. No surprise really as that's the norm for reddit in general. I can't even justify wasting my time in there anymore.

It's nice to hear a voice of reason on this subject and sad that he has to waste his time countering these B.S. narratives.

As expected, this opreturn limit outrage is a nothing-burger.

nostr:nevent1qqsgsc3lfarzl6sjrnrewxxl88fme3ztewhrtf4tp5u56l7uhuxzdmcpzdmhxue69uhhwmm59e6hg7r09ehkuef0qgs0w2xeumnsfq6cuuynpaw2vjcfwacdnzwvmp59flnp3mdfez3czpsrqsqqqqqp06wyd9

Dan Held sounds an awful lot like a 2016 nocoiner about Nostr.

"Remember Bitcoin? It was going to be the world reserve currency remember? 🤣"

https://x.com/danheld/status/1901335339198796202