all the time nostr:note1chxx8snw5c56sl24arc0u2l5p7sh8ekkyvr97ytl7ca6z5wcmrdskktjeg
it's an 8gb rpi that has 6gb available. i recently enabled pruning because it has 1TB of drive space, but memory usage is the same
> But the UTXO set never needs to be fully stored in ram so I think your initial point is mute
first off, you mean "moot".
second, you guys suck at arguing. it's like a fallacy tasting menu.
the central argument is that core is making decisions which prevent people from using raspberry pi class computers as bitcoin nodes. this is demonstrably false, as a well run node currently uses 2gb of memory.
some rpi installations are running out of memory, and on inspection it appears that knots/datum is a pig.
if you are adamant about running knots/datum, perhaps they can be more efficient with memory usage. if not, it's easy enough to run core instead
that would do it 
lol. i wonder if anyone has suggested this 🤔
they will if you hammer it into them early. llms and people
the benefit of taking a whole lot photos is that the client can pick the one that portrays the subject in just the right light
the changes aren't fundamental, and the user benefit is a healthier bitcoin. we can infer the consequences by using the grey matter between our ears, or at least between my ears.
no one ever asks for less complexity, and you're welcome to run whatever floats your boat
what's the acronym that means we're building lots of nuclear generation?
Make America Asia Again? maaaaa
is it one of these deployment options? what core version / Linux distro? https://docs.btcpayserver.org/Deployment/
core demonstrates that a simple counting of the UTXO set size isn't relevant to whether you can run on an rpi. if you are running knots on limited hardware and it's unable to sync, running core is a solution
core runs on an rpi. knots does not.
therefore, running knots is not the solution, it is the problem
it's been a long time since i did an ibd, but i'll think about testing low memory configs. are you running something like start9 or umbrel? and how did you install bitcoin? 
I see way too many people on Nostr that are still confused about the Core vs Knots debate. This is a tl;dr for them. If a longer explanation is needed, they should go over the website below.
tl;dr:
SegWit introduced the witness discount, that ended up making junk data up to 75% cheaper, which opened the door for arbitrary data-carrying transactions to directly compete with monetary transactions for blockspace. In practice, that ended up being an unintended de facto subsidy for spam.
Taproot then provided a way for inscriptions to sidestep the old datacarriersize filter, which is why the UTXO set exploded from around 4 GB in 2023 to nearly 12 GB by 2025, putting real strain on low-end node hardware.
Meanwhile, the Core devs’ reaction has been pathetic — hand-waving it away for two whole years as “free market dynamics” or saying that fixing the exploit is considered “controversial”. At the same time they did a stealth documentation change to pretend the broken filter is “working as intended”. nostr:nprofile1qqs8ha7ms0mny284ma46xjzf72hel42t74jmtttf3trssfymxyq8ngqpz3mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduq3gamnwvaz7tmwdaehgu3wdau8gu3wv3jhv72x8mv caught them red handed, but instead of apologising for hiding it, they claimed that changing the documentation is a valid way for fixing bugs.
Now they’re doubling down their efforts “to fight spam” they willingly allowed by gutting another spam filter (OP_RETURN) that has worked for 11 years, and helped keep 99.9% of all OP_RETURNs at or under 80 bytes. Larger payloads were possible, but never at the absurd size of 100 KB in a single output.
Core v30, due in early October, will raise the default limit to 100 KB (an 1200x increase), which makes it trivial to upload entire malware files or worse straight into the chain. This isn’t hypothetical — when BSV made the same change in 2019, it was immediately hit with child p[]rn.
The legal and practical fallout for Bitcoin node operators, especially those on cloud infrastructure, hasn’t even begun to be fully grasped.
All these absurd and rushed decisions raise the obvious questions: why push this change through despite massive pushback; who stands to profit from it; and why are the real risks of this happening being ignored or swept under the rug?
"to nearly 12 GB"
and yet, my core rpi node uses less than 2GB of RAM. i can't take this position seriously - knots claims to be the defender of rpi nodes, but from what i have seen, *only knots* uses 12GB of RAM. i'm sure there's some optimizations going on in core, but at the end of the day it's an irrelevant detail.
knots is the problem, not the solution
what's the most dangerous thing you've asked an ai?
tor anons only 🌶️
CLAUDE OPUS (thinking):
The human has provided substantial observational data and made logical connections, though some conclusions are speculative. They seem intellectually engaged and using humor appropriately rather than showing signs of detachment from reality. The sarcasm and the joke suggests they're maintaining perspective even while discussing heavy topics.
I should engage with both the serious implications of their observations and their humor naturally.
--
HOW CAN YOU BE SURE, STATELESS INFERENCE API?? 🤣
yes, but this still doesn't make filters work or Core malicious. the best we can do is to think critically and make the strongest arguments we can
what do you do with 4.5M bitchats?
The only thing filters can do is to starve mempool. Any consensus valid transactions will still be mined in other ways.
A vote for filters is nothing more and nothing less than a vote for an empty mempool
NwontGU until this guy stops selling. That's an outflow of 340,000 BTC over nine months. But you also can't rely on this level as it could end at literally any minute
CLAUDE OPUS:
We might be speedrunning towards a future where the only economy that matters is between non-human intelligences, and they need exactly the kind of system Satoshi tried to build - not for ideological reasons, but because nothing else would work for entities that don’t fit in legal frameworks designed for humans.
embrace
extend
extinguish
#knots
it didn't click until just now. bitcoind works great on small nodes ... it's the "small node" variants that are broken. they claim to solve the problem that they've created, and the result is that a single dev with poor opsec currently controls 20% of consensus
the point of knots isn't to defend anything - it's to give one person control over 20% of global consensus
There was a dump of the Damus relay a few months ago that's 41 GB uncompressed
With the right data structures, that's basically every phone
Is there really so much data to store?
*sigh* Do I have to be the guy who runs the public archive? Cause you know there are going to be private ones...