Yeah not doing themselves any favors

There’s no global mempool policy- Core is just the current dominant implementation.

To answer the question directly though:

I’d be more open to it changing if they put in a witness data limit too. Prunable arbitrary data is better than UTXO bloat. But none of these assholes have the balls to propose a reasonable witness data limit so in the meantime gonna run Knots.

Semi what do you think of unlimited witness data?

Genesis block used coinbase input which miners still use mostly for mundane things

Everyone talking about OP_RETURN but nobody talking about witness data is pretty wild.

The irony is that with the current PR, Core devs might actually push everyone to switch to Knots, which limits witness data to 400kb (which is what actually matters to block current abuses) and OP_RETURN to 42 bytes (which does nothing).

Core would have more credibility IMO to increase OP_RETURN size (opening up the design space for prunable metadata ledger use — way better than what’s currently happening) if they paired it with a witness data limit in the same PR.

It appears it was the original intention. If you’re digging deep you really need to look at how witness data is used vs. what people actually do with 40 or 80 bytes of op return (basically nothing).

“It’s possible to embed data in the blockchain, but it’s better not to.”

Satoshi, 2010

What fun is that?

The Satoshi part was a bit of a troll regarding Peter Todd (who I believe helped implement it)

In all seriousness, it’s a release valve to embed arbitrary data while preventing UTXO bloat. Without it, you could argue people would use worse ways to store arbitrary data on the blockchain. That’s the compromise.

Comprimise from Satoshi

This and people still not using Bitcoin as money

cool, the sack is

The outdoor finishes on the building they are living in look relatively new, so the irony is the building they are living in likely “took” that view from someone behind them as well.

One day

Shooting you a DM regarding accommodations 🫡

Purple pill them all 🫡

Sickkkk

*What Nostr Can Learn from China’s “Shanzhai” Innovation Culture*

(LLM generated post, sharing my own exploration)

What is Shanzhai?

“Shanzhai” (山寨), originally meaning “mountain fortress,” came to describe China’s copycat tech culture: cheap knockoff phones, rapid iterations, and grassroots manufacturing. But it wasn’t just piracy—it was fast, permissionless, user-driven innovation that thrived outside formal IP systems.

China’s loose enforcement of intellectual property laws enabled:

• Rapid copying and adaptation of global tech

• Lower barriers to entry for new manufacturers

• A culture of remixing and tailoring products for niche markets

While this sped up China’s industrial and technological rise, it also limited incentives for deep, original innovation until IP protections were strengthened.

⸻

What can Nostr learn?

Nostr, like shanzhai, is a permissionless, decentralized ecosystem. It can adopt similar lessons to drive faster, more adaptable innovation:

1. Copying is iteration, not theft.

Clients and relays should embrace feature cloning and forking as natural evolution—not fight it. Every fork is an experiment.

2. Serve niche communities, not just mass markets.

Shanzhai succeeded by filling overlooked gaps (like dual-SIM phones). Nostr can build clients for underserved groups: privacy nerds, low-bandwidth users, language-specific communities.

3. Build modular, remixable infrastructure.

Shenzhen’s factories worked because of open supply chains. Nostr can encourage modularity: interchangeable relays, identity systems, media hosts, payment integrations.

4. Move fast, polish later.

Shanzhai products shipped early, fixed bugs on the fly. Nostr should reward experimentation over perfection—let users test wild ideas even before a formal NIP process.

5. Foster a remix culture.

Don’t just fork—combine features, protocols, and interfaces in unexpected ways. Think ActivityPub + Nostr hybrids, or content feeds that pull from diverse networks.

⸻

A caution:

Shanzhai’s limits remind us: copying alone won’t build long-term trust, UX excellence, or deep tech leadership. Eventually, Nostr will need to consolidate around reliable systems and great user experience to scale beyond early adopters.

Bottom line:

Nostr can take inspiration from shanzhai’s scrappy, experimental roots—while preparing for the hard work of building sustainable innovation

Creapure. 5g. Not every day

Plant medicine is a better term

Pharmaceuticals are gross, agreed

Can you post the sauce? Would love it as a reference

I wish I could zap this comment for Encino High lmao

Mises et al never had a model for Bitcoin or the related technologies, and the associated incentives in maintaining that decentralized system. They had no idea about miners, block rewards, nodes, etc.

Austrian is great aspirationally, obviously I’m all about it, but even Mises admitted towards the end of his life that economics couldn’t perfectly model human action in dynamic systems. Bitcoin might not only represent a monetary good… it’s an evolving network secured by incentives that no classical Austrian ever had a framework for. We’re in new territory.

You should design your own blockchain! With blackjack and hookers

I think it also has a sticky mainstream marketing problem unfortunately

That’s what you got from that? Alrighty

Lol 💜

If it is a strategic reserve asset on a corporate or government treasury they want NGU and “security go up” long term.

In a monetary-only Bitcoin world miners are strictly selling (or maybe leveraging) BTC for revenue. Which is eventually only tx fees.

So these fees need to be high enough such that miners are willing to pay to secure the network. Or else the corporations/governments stacks are insecure both from a price and security standpoint simultaneously.

Bitcoin IS awesome!

That’s a beautiful future we all hope for- but the path there matters and is not guaranteed

The tax issue is a huge barrier right now yes I agree, but over time (if you are sat flow positive) you are still winning by a huge margin over fiat. It is also a tax benefit when it goes down…

Probably a lot of early people are waiting for a tax free scenario- but they can also have a separate batch acquired later for spending/flows and just not do FIFO with their OG stack.

Then take action to prevent this issue from being urgent to others who depend on the network

Ultimately, in a pure monetary system miners sell bitcoin for revenue.

You’re right, the difficulty adjustment will self correct the equation.

But the game works in both directions - if there’s no block reward then they need to sell tx fees.

And if there’s no tx fees they sell whatever the fuck they have. Until network security is at risk because the difficulty adjustment went dowwwwwwnnn. This is the instability that is modeled out in the papers Peter Todd references. And is one of the main critiques of folks like Nassim Taleb and Mike Green that has yet to be answered by monetary purists.

I’m choosing to answer with action- so are others in their own way. If saying “put your money where your mouth is” can be considered shaming people then yes I’m shaming people lol.

“Naturally” is a strong word here

I can only assume it opens up the design space for more uses of block space.

You’re taking the word “money” and using it against me, without arguing against what I’m really saying: using it as a medium of exchange is important to drive settlement demand. No matter the layer- the more economic activity, the more base chain settlement demand, eventually. No shit it’s dumb for people to use base chain for everything- so this means the monetary use on upper layers needs to be EVEN BIGGER to drive massive settlements.

I literally said express your view however you want (near the end, if you got that far). I’m just warning of the potential consequences.

No offense, but I’m not gonna put too much stock in your price and energy projections- I’d say the same to anyone.

PV, thx for your thoughts and engagement.

Exactly. Thank you

Thx

If y’all want Bitcoin to stay purely a monetary protocol- then start fucking using it as money.

Before you read this take, know that my ideal scenario is monetary protocol only. Also know that I think it’s fucking dumb that nostr:nprofile1qqs8fl79rnpsz5x00xmvkvtd8g2u7ve2k2dr3lkfadyy4v24r4k3s4spremhxue69uhkummnw3ez6ur4vgh8wetvd3hhyer9wghxuet59uq32amnwvaz7tmjv4kxz7fwv3sk6atn9e5k7tc9vz57s got silenced for expressing a valid concern.

Here we go:

Hodling, sitting and waiting for NGU do NOTHING to increase long term demand for blockspace- which, in case you didn’t know, is needed to secure and stabilize the network once the block reward dwindles. This is what most people in Bitcoin do, unfortunately. This is why we started Conduit and why I’m personally hyper focused on marketplaces: if we can make global Bitcoin circular economies then there’s a chance this thing becomes self-sustaining and the phase change to zero block reward doesn’t result in fucking chaos.

So far, Nostr is the biggest circular economy here, and hate to say it, but since it’s all happening on Lightning we are barely moving the needle for base chain settlement demand. Surprised about empty blocks? I’m not.

Do all of you who disapprove of Core devs approach to increase block space demand actually use the blockchain for anything besides UTXO management when fees are low? Are you building anything that increases block space demand for monetary use?

nostr:nprofile1qqsve2jcud7fnjzmchn4gq52wx9agey9uhfukv69dy0v4wpuw4w53nqpr3mhxue69uhkummnw3ezucnfw33k76twv4ezuum0vd5kzmqpp4mhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mqx7hhq8 is not stupid. He’s been writing about long term instability for years: https://petertodd.org/2022/surprisingly-tail-emission-is-not-inflationary

Important quote:

“To date no proof-of-work currency has ever operated solely on transaction fees, and academic analysis has found that in this condition block generation is unstable. To paraphrase Andrew Poelstra, it’s a scary phase change that no other coin has gone through.”

He also created Opentimestamps which is severely under used in my opinion (NIP 03 would enable so many great features for a decentralized social protocol).

Neither is nostr:nprofile1qqs0w2xeumnsfq6cuuynpaw2vjcfwacdnzwvmp59flnp3mdfez3czpsprpmhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumn0wd68y6trdqhxgef0qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnyv9kh2uewd9hj7wrtw00 stupid. Or anyone else involved in the current drama. They’ve probably thought this through more than most.

You think these people are evil and don’t care about Bitcoin’s long term health? Think again. They are being practical and doing something about the blockspace demand problem.

You don’t agree with how they are going about it? Then build something that increases demand for block space in the way YOU want it.

Or run Knots. That’s a great and valid way to express that view. I support it. But make sure you’re prepared for the consequences if you win this war (stay sat flow positive)- and probably consider using the base chain more, or participating in the Bitcoin circular economy (which means spending Bitcoin).

I find it funny how so many people here celebrated big money and big government when it came in and are now surprised these same parties are taking action to protect their investment. If you don’t do it yourselves, they’ll continue to do so for you.

It really amazes me what gets funded sometimes.

I could see the scam being something like this… $200M is the “sticker” funding, with the actual release of funds being on a slower timeline with milestones.

But the VCs get their cash back and then some thru the token sale before they put in too much. Then they turn off the cash spigot when it doesn’t go well.

Basically how many of these crypto scams go- VCs found a way to take minimal risk thru token issuances. Many of them are also conveniently in the market making game. It’s all a fugazi.

Hey! Because it allows an asynchronous yet automatic checkout flow. Otherwise the merchant (or an agent controlling their nsec) needs to be present to generate a Lightning invoice and finalize the transaction. It’s a really cool part of the nostr:nprofile1qqsyda3mvuruue6fvl3nq2p39d8espqee26zppfs7u3sx8jd7ccrayqpzamhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgtcpzamhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumn0wd68ytnzv9hxgtcdxs706 spec that nostr:nprofile1qqsdxm5qs0a8kdk6aejxew9nlx074g7cnedrjeggws0sq03p4s9khmqpzemhxue69uhksctkv4hzucmpd3mxztnyv4mz7qgwwaehxw309ahx7uewd3hkctc8leskz is already using for Nostrized e-commerce. Yes it requires an extra step to get back to Lightning that seems redundant, and trust in an ecash mint, but it takes the burden off the merchant to run an ever-present server for automatic checkout.

Tulum is the half baked millennial love affair between a cartel boss’ daughter and a Yale yuppie dropout trying to find meaning in his life

This npub just out here passionately hustling as far as I can tell

nostr:nevent1qqsvrqgqy7h7u7fj9a88vxuk76wthvvr2emvn7yh5q3wg8ju5pk8hecpzemhxw309ucnjv3wxymrst338qhrww3hxumnwgflpyj

Fantastic, now I have an awesome argument against my socialist friends: they generally dislike the system they live in, and it’s ironically nearer to what they worship than capitalism.

TIL Andreas Antonopoulos was on JRE in 2016

nostr:note1jud5fwsshad6kz38eta3fueesl0jfsjyeywq5cwu607m3kfrx97sndwen7