Fighting over opinions and ideas is exactly as it should be. This is good for Bitcoin.
I have no concerns over nodes. You can get a 2TB umbrel home for few hundered usd. I also run a Pi. Blocksize hasn't changed, if blocks are fuller than normal so be it. Imo you've got change fatigue from Taproot, people I speak to want to leave it the fwck alone.
If I was in the US I'd vote Trump then call up Saylor and Dorsey to pay him off with some sats and get Ross out.
I don't like the shitcoinery but it's not affecting operation of the network. The extra block space bloat isn't good and fees have spiked for short periods but imo this doesn't warrant tinkering. My bar for intervention on the base layer is very high. Now it's been done, let's see how it plays out and focus on preventing the same mistakes being made in the future.
I saw that like 90% of users are married men. That's fwcked up.
Shaming is how a civilised society tells you to check your behavior. The woke just weaponised it for political gain. Men should be shamed for breaking up families, women should be shamed for being hoes. Religion used to provide the basic rules for a cohesive society but we collectively threw it away and now everyone has an OF.
Insert man pointing at himself in the mirror meme
If Bitcoin is winning but you want to change Bitcoin, then maybe you're not winning. If you aren't winning, maybe ask yourself why you're not before changing the protocol. Or maybe you think Bitcoin isn't winning because it doesn't conform to your view of what winning looks like. Then maybe you need to reflect on your vision for Bitcoin. Maybe I'm wrong and Bitcoin isn't winning but I can't imagine a way that Bitcoin could be winning any harder or faster than it currently is.
https://x.com/mpetrus19/status/1794859954899443754 I’ve been waiting for this to happen but it doesn’t seem like it’s coming. The brainwashing is too strong . I hope they do wake up tho
Can see people actively resisting what they know to be true. If it does come, it'll happen violently like he says.
I checked mempool several times today and almost all of the time, I found mempool filled with garbage data (to scam the people).
If these blocks have been filled with garbage most of the time then why do we need 4MB blocks?
Why are Bitcoiners talking about further upgrades? Instead it would be WISE to talk about reducing the blocksize limit since the free market has been trying to tell us that we don't need 4MB blocks. It's being misused by attackers and spammers.
Reducing the blocksize will probably do following things: -
1) Keep the cost of running nodes very low (hence it helps with decentralization)
2) It promotes scalability in layers (i.e. L2, L3 etc) instead of on chain scaling.
What are the real risks by reducing block size? Except some scammers can't scam the people easily (but I believe that's a good thing)
I think #bitcoin thrives more with conservatism than progressivism.
cc nostr:npub1lh273a4wpkup00stw8dzqjvvrqrfdrv2v3v4t8pynuezlfe5vjnsnaa9nk nostr:npub1wnlu28xrq9gv77dkevck6ws4euej4v568rlvn66gf2c428tdrptqq3n3wr nostr:npub1au23c73cpaq2whtazjf6cdrmvam6nkd4lg928nwmgl78374kn29sq9t53j
The case for making blocks smaller is stronger than increasing efficiency. Although I'd do neither.
It's this kind of reckless development that pushes me towards the Saylor camp. We literally did a soft fork 3 years ago and that gave us more dick butt jpgs. CTV looks way more broad based. Sit your ass down for 5 years minimum ffs.
Just looked into CTV proposal. lol no. We're winning this hard and people are advocating for transaction level protocol changes, you must be out of your mind.
These are separate to CTV tho correct? CTV is feature adding not bug fixing.
Nostr recommends it, I try it 🤝