Moving forward is hard, but sometimes, it’s the only option.
I hope hue have someone with hue to help ease the pain, and find new meaning.
As soon as he said the word, “yield”
$20-40 Billion of open interest long bitcoin was LIQUIDATED, Blackrock bought 45k bitcoins at $105k while plebs couldn’t smash buy down there on Strike. Then Blackrock got about a 10% gain over the week-end. Fixed that for you.
Well, if you don’t mind investing with Blackrock, and having child sexual abuse on the same chain where you verify your money, then continue.
Sell that, if you can.
It’s a sad day for me, because I won’t be part of that.
Image text:
It looks like you're trying to fix a problem that the government created by applying more government. What are you, some kind of fucking moron?
Shared via https://contex.st
Clippy is the best!
And the super-cycle happens when the mid-cutvers say fick it, YOLO! Then they sell the bottom.
So you think you can tell
Heaven from Hell
Blue skies from pain
Can you tell a green field from a cold steel rail?
A smile from a veil?
Do you think you can tell.
Pink Floyd - wish You Were Here
If my one node could decide if a block gets rejected, I’d do that.
Probably Claude
This is how Bitcoiners are made.
It’s the hard times that make the strong men.
nostr:nevent1qqspyqpqdwfska5clq3y3l0zym3j0tzppztt8nw2k4fvcfvn7qh58zqzzeh9y
I know a guy that tried to change the layout of letters on a keyboard one time, to make it easier to code.
He said he was worried the world would explode.
They want to turn bitcoin into BSV, let them fork it, this shouldn’t be a soft fork. This is not what I’d call a change with consensus.
What happens to perpetrators is irrelevant to the node operator, as once said content passed through consensus rules it has to be stored and shared, unless the node opts out of the network altogether, or in some way avoids part of the chain by running pruned. As far as I know, there is no pruned way to avoid csam with a pruned node as it is more about which blocks when, not content. And neither should someone who wants to run a full archive node have to comply with such things. I’m not a fed, and we’re not talking AML. It’s a fundamental difference between free speech and expectations to host and share things that are counter-productive to our species and to knowingly do so.
The principles of the cypherpunks and free speech are one thing.
Expecting people to host and share things that go against their morals is quite the opposite.
You could just quote eric hughes: Cypherpunks seek your questions and your concerns and hope we may engage you so that we may not deceive ourselves. I think you may be focusing on the next line, where he says they will not be moved out of their course, and being disengenuous about that first part.
There’s a good chance I know that bitcoin doesn’t care, qnd I know I haven’t contributed to it as much as most of you.
But this is still an ass hole move, and a dismissal of my time and efforts. I’m trying my best to not become a salty enemy of bitcoin now, but toxic bullshit like this…
I’ve sold and notrunning a node anymore. If core 30 goes through as planned and consensus rules allow larger jpegs of things that are illegal to store, I’m not coming back. It doesn’t take a core developer to understand this.
We’ve only just begun - Chubbs
You: spam.. there is no alternative.
Me: go Fuck yourself.
Core is making themselves irrelevant by working against the people who use their software most. I’m here to have monetary sovereignty, not store all the jpegs people want to smear all over a VERY distributed database. If I wanted to do that, I guess I’d run a free nostr relay,