Lol, I have to zap myself 100 sats to share this episode :-)
https://fountain.fm/episode/CKRxIzMnQXrzl5OFLhV7
nostr:nevent1qvzqqqpxquqzqgeclsy02vvsc9h03f3xnyv0k3zmldu8sk8nlc7s8qah45uaxqtv6pr7g3
"The dollar is king, we're gonna keep it that way. Just saying, if people wanna challenge it, they can, but they're going to pay a big price. And I don't think any of them are willing to pay that price." - Donald Trump
Now you know. To be fair, it was in reference to BRICS and you can't accuse the man of consistency.
https://fountain.fm/episode/gzfxBKiY94NTCUKySPQ2
nostr:nevent1qvzqqqpxquqzqq93dm3dzs9u6zxvlmzypvng57z33y2v0xkm24wsv2p6sf4ffhyzglzr7g
Still can't believe X users have their (eye) balls scanned.
https://fountain.fm/episode/rgEmfe8E7ivWuORiUdA1
nostr:nevent1qvzqqqpxquqzq6vgy2dhvqehrwy32c6k7j87m3w0cvra4vjwqudysl8au5ntala9wmvfly
Whaha, I've been in DC more often than Odell and I'm a foreigner.
https://fountain.fm/episode/0SwABFKl22JmThk9ARlz
nostr:nevent1qvzqqqpxquqzp8ym3whkh9m8lsrz3vfka4ul5edy899r0yuvl3e2w47mxsrmgnpwcrmfnv
Removals after removal are my favorite type of removal. And I have a PR on top of this that removes even more :-) #MakeBitcoinCoreMaintainableAgain
There seems to be genuine confusion about how open source works. In particular some people believe that Bitcoin Core developers have a fiduciary duty, either towards them personally or towards some general notion of the Bitcoin network. They are surprised that I and some others respond to this rather aggressively.
Remember that this is the argument Craig Wright tried to make. He failed, but not after millions of dollars were burnt on defending these developers. And not after several quit because of the stress. Don't go down this path.
To put it as a catchy phrase: open source means you can do whatever you want with the code, not with the people who write it.
Open source lets you fork code, and modify it to your liking. That's pretty much what I do every day, which isn't to say that I don't also try to make sure other people like it. I get paid in Bitcoin and OpenSats keeps their whole treasury in it, so the idea that I want destroy potential future income is rather retarded.
Part of CSW's demands was that Bitcoin Core wrote specific (confiscation) code for him. Eventually he just hired people to write it for him, as one should, but somehow that still wasn't enough for him. I get a very similar vibe from people who run Knots but yet don't find that enough. Should we worry about a new round of lawsuits?
It's also unclear what he's offended by. If it's the "catholic" part, I'm merely describing the suspect without any value judgement. There's additional context that allowed me to narrow it down. I won't share that, because it's something only the perpetrator would know, so potentially relevant if they escalate.
Ja, ik ben een van de (daadwerkelijke) reviewers van de pull request(s) die de op_return limiet verwijderen. Mijn ack heeft aanzienlijk meer gewicht dan een drive-by commenter. Daarnaast heb ik een vrij uitgesproken en geïnformeerde (toch?) mening over dit onderwerp hier op nostr en mijn podcast.
Ik ben hier niet bepaald gevoelig voor, danwel ik raak er extra gemotiveerd van, maar veel developers zijn een stuk voorzichtiger en zouden hier wel degelijk door ontmoedigd worden. Zie bijvoorbeeld de opmerking op Reddit van achow101 dat ze onmiddellijk op unsubscribe drukte van die eerste pull request.
Intimidatie. Zelfde principe als een granaat voor je door, alleen een mildere stap. Probleem is dat je niet weet wat de volgende stap is.
No. Donations are not a contract for performance of specific tasks or the creation of a fiduciary relationship. They are appreciated of course.
Someone, probably a US based catholic young male, subscribed my email to a bunch of lists in order to spam me. I can't be bothered to trace the IP they used for this. But Luke, control your herd.
> this will be my last comment on this topic
Well, that aged like a Higgs boson... Bitcoin Explained episode 98 coming soon(tm).
And then there's still people who claim they haven't seen any technical arguments of this change. Sure, if you refuse to read.
Reminds me of a Bitcoin lawyer who was often a guest on Junseth's podcast, forgot his name, who used to say: "I'm a lawyer, but not YOUR lawyer"
cc nostr:npub1xapjgsushef5wwn78vac6pxuaqlke9g5hqdfjlanky3uquh0nauqx0cnde
Excellent take by me! :-)
The fact that many Bitcoin Core developers are paid by someone, when that someone is NOT YOU, does not make YOU a customer that gets to demand things. You need to hire developers directly if you want to work on your behalf.
nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzpp59a0hkv5ecm45nrckvmu7pnk0sukssvly33u3wwzquy4v037hcqy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnyv9kh2uewd9hj7qgewaehxw309ahx7um5wgh8xurjdamx7mmnwshxump0qqsvgyvfqz383j30szkg24hzyvvcvenmzdp2areaea68n0g8wnspdcqj6tstn
Everyone saying filters "don't work" because spammers are just using op_return_bot to get around them? Yeah, op_return_bot has to charges double the regular fee rate or its bypass doesn't work reliably. This is a huge deterrent. The filters work.
Source: https://github.com/benthecarman/OP-RETURN-Bot/blob/master/app/controllers/InvoiceMonitor.scala
Quadrupple it!
Moderation guidelines are not in the Bitcoin Core codebase itself. That would make no sense, since any fork could and should have its own policy.
There's ongoing effort to move bitcoin/bitcoin to bitcoin-core/bitcoin to reduce that confusion.
https://github.com/bitcoin-core/meta/blob/main/MODERATION-GUIDELINES.md
That particular section was mostly written ten years ago, even before the Blocksize wars. Social media powered brigading wasn't much of a thing back then. It could make sense to update it and mention that each fork may or may not have a moderation policy.
https://img.sprovoost.nl/845ede961226b3d832259cca1fea1ea96d195debbf21512b1eba2918475f48b7.webp
How many times do people need to repeat this? USE SOMETHING ELSE IF YOU'RE UNHAPPY.
There's also the question of how many people audit the 1370 commits that make Knots different. It's basically a giant patch set on top of Bitcoin Core, similar to what Liquid does. Despite my issues with Luke, I do trust him to not steal peoples coins.
But that's not an ideal trust model. Part of the problem is a lack of upstreaming. And that's not always because of a fundamental disagreement on functionality. Sometimes the patches just don't meet the review bar for Bitcoin Core. That itself isn't the end of the world either, but it does make comparative review harder.
But I hear OpenSats is going to fix that with grants? :-)
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/v28.1...bitcoinknots:bitcoin:28.x-knots
There haven't been that many incidents like this one. The previous round of OP_RETURN drama also saw some moderation. Also, it took many years to agree on having a moderation policy in the first place.
nostr:nevent1qqsqlnd2ecqcxcugukej4ar9cv2d755mz4ynyjdd3zxpveqhad40qcclluyne
Here's an alternative timeline to consider: Bitcoin Core as a project seizes to exist, no more updates appear on Github. The current developers are all hired by different companies that can afford it. They continue to work, and informally exchange patches.
Some of those patches are published, and maybe one or two developers maintain a public collection of the most useful patches. The end result would be that most users are running inferior software compared to the corporations with money. Afaik this would be perfectly legal under the MIT license.
People seem to be confused about the fact that although Bitcoin Core is open source software, the bitcoin/bitcoin Github repository is a private space, not a public square. As a private space it has rules. Very few, and there's not much enforcement, but they're there. And those rules are not decided by users (in fact, ultimately Microsoft controls the domain).
People are free to fork the code and create an alternative space to work on that code. There they can have whatever rules they want. You can make it completely private. The MIT license is very permissive, you don't even have to share the resulting code. You could also allow anyone to comment and sell viagra pills. Up to you!
Such code forks are not ideal though. It could create confusion around where to download the "real" Bitcoin Core. Slightly different codebases make things difficult to audit. When implementations diverge too much, it will make future soft forks hard to coordinate. But if contributors to Bitcoin Core can't get any work done when doing so in public, they'll have to find another way to get work done.
So as a user, you should not be happy when brigading happens on the repo. Those are precious developer days being wasted, in which actual bugs are not being fixed - or even introduced because tired developers make mistakes.
Even if you disagree with a specific change, you have an interest in that being communicated in a non-disruptive manner.
It was already multiple times on that pull request that conceptual discussion needs to happen on the mailinglist. Yet people ignore that instruction. And as I predicted, they kept doing so.
When people break into your office and start screaming at staff, sending them away is not "censorship".
> You suggested censoring people which is a form of harassment
It's complete nonsense and I don't have time to engage bad faith actors like "BitcoinIsFuture".
You can leave a comment (not answer) on the Stack Exchange post asking for clarification. I can edit or expand it later.
Ethiopië is niet eens een voormalige kolonie, maar de Tweede Kamer wil er zich mee bemoeien. Tekst van de motie:
Vragen van de leden Diederik van Dijk, Stoffer en Flach (allen SGP) aan de ministers van Buitenlandse Zaken, van Financiën en voor Buitenlandse Handel en Ontwikkelingshulp over het bericht ‘Cryptomijnen in een land onder hoogspanning’.
• Bent u bekend met het artikel ‘Cryptomijnen in een land onder hoogspanning’?[1]
• Welke Nederlandse of Europese wet- en regelgeving, dan wel IMVO-normen, zijn van toepassing op Nederlandse ondernemers en bedrijven die actief zijn in het cryptomijnen in derde landen?
• Wat is precies de toegevoegde waarde van het cryptomijnen in Ethiopië aan de lokale economie en samenleving?
• In hoeverre profiteert de lokale bevolking van Ethiopië van de praktijken die in het artikel genoemd worden?
• Kan het kabinet toelichten wat volgens haar de wenselijkheid is van het cryptomijnen in Ethiopië door Nederlandse ondernemers en bedrijven?
• Hoe ziet de inzet van het kabinet eruit om de beperkte elektriciteit die voorradig is in Ethiopië ten goede te laten komen aan de bevolking zelf?
• Acht het kabinet het noodzakelijk om met extra regelgeving te komen om de negatieve gevolgen van cryptomijnen in derde landen te verminderen, en zo nee, waarom niet?
• Wat is het morele oordeel van het kabinet over het artikel, met name met het oog op de schrijnende armoede en grote maatschappelijke problemen die een land als Ethiopië teisteren?
• Hoe verhoudt de ontwikkeling die in het artikel genoemd wordt zich tot de Nederlandse hulp aan Ethiopië? Werken deze elkaar niet tegen?
https://www.tweedekamer.nl/kamerstukken/kamervragen/detail?id=2025D19807&did=2025D19807
[1] De Volkskrant, 29 april 2025, ‘Cryptomijnen in een land onder hoogspanning’, (https://www.volkskrant.nl/kijkverder/v/2025/ethiopie-bitcoin-miners-crypto~v1402259/)
Ethiopië is niet eens een voormalige kolonie, maar de Tweede Kamer wil er zich mee bemoeien. Tekst van de motie:
Vragen van de leden Diederik van Dijk, Stoffer en Flach (allen SGP) aan de ministers van Buitenlandse Zaken, van Financiën en voor Buitenlandse Handel en Ontwikkelingshulp over het bericht ‘Cryptomijnen in een land onder hoogspanning’.
• Bent u bekend met het artikel ‘Cryptomijnen in een land onder hoogspanning’?[1]
• Welke Nederlandse of Europese wet- en regelgeving, dan wel IMVO-normen, zijn van toepassing op Nederlandse ondernemers en bedrijven die actief zijn in het cryptomijnen in derde landen?
• Wat is precies de toegevoegde waarde van het cryptomijnen in Ethiopië aan de lokale economie en samenleving?
• In hoeverre profiteert de lokale bevolking van Ethiopië van de praktijken die in het artikel genoemd worden?
• Kan het kabinet toelichten wat volgens haar de wenselijkheid is van het cryptomijnen in Ethiopië door Nederlandse ondernemers en bedrijven?
• Hoe ziet de inzet van het kabinet eruit om de beperkte elektriciteit die voorradig is in Ethiopië ten goede te laten komen aan de bevolking zelf?
• Acht het kabinet het noodzakelijk om met extra regelgeving te komen om de negatieve gevolgen van cryptomijnen in derde landen te verminderen, en zo nee, waarom niet?
• Wat is het morele oordeel van het kabinet over het artikel, met name met het oog op de schrijnende armoede en grote maatschappelijke problemen die een land als Ethiopië teisteren?
• Hoe verhoudt de ontwikkeling die in het artikel genoemd wordt zich tot de Nederlandse hulp aan Ethiopië? Werken deze elkaar niet tegen?
https://www.tweedekamer.nl/kamerstukken/kamervragen/detail?id=2025D19807&did=2025D19807
To cite Roger Ver:
> The market determines the ideal block size and network fee.
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/errkm2/the_market_determines_the_ideal_block_size_and/
And specifically to Nostr, discoverability is quite low. Not as bad as with podcasts though :-)
Cross-posting without tailoring to the platform often doesn't work well. Someone might be big on Youtube and non-existent on X.
Give the man more followers!
nostr:note1kphydjtptj2wycuz8g7qnqjzgtx9ng76gus2r2d9cmt34yyydqgqa7ltt8
Sorry, I should have split that reply. The first part was an answer to your question, the last bit referred to Bitcoin Mechanic, who should know better which forums are appropriate for which concerns.
Unless those leaked nudes are on the blockchain :-(
Rutte zou erop wijzen dat dat nooit kan gebeuren met een Nokia!
New people could ping someone they know out of bound, or use ecash.
Nip5 can also be used if you have (web of) trusted domains, especially when something like Ditto takes off.
Client side muting still allows people to peak into their replies and repost/zap someone into their web of trust.
Different clients and relays can try a combination of things.
nostr:note1cjq2ucwkh83x43juvu7fs0nn5lwjz6a4vasxwz4478v04ql85f4s5dvhj9