pull down to refresh

"Run Knots" they say. "Save Bitcoin" they say. "Bitcoin is money" they say.
OK... so are those people saying "Bitcoin is Money" using it as such? My guess is roughly 1/2 of the transactions of late are "monetary" as opposed to 'data carrying' or designed to primarily carry data...
So who is to blame?

"Bitcoin is Money" yes. And that means that all the world's monetary demand can and will outbid a random JPEG right?
Transactors in the US, Europe, Japan, South America etc are competing to get "on chain" right? To spend and use Bitcoin correct?
Well... after those capital gains are paid on every individual coffee, or Nostr Zap, all the merchants know how to "accept Bitcoin", governments agree that "it's money" it is being adopted...
People will then be tripping over themselves to "spend Bitcoin" right?
After all there are no onerous "capital gains" taxes to keep track of for every Cup of Coffee right?
Because the Knots/Core debate is addressing this... -> ???

OH but Core will BLOW OPEN THE SPAM FILTERS! Plebs (who are the "monetary maximalist" people!) will need to upgrade their Storage!!! Gigabytes and Gigabytes!
Except for the fact that op_return is 4x as expensive as Witness, and "more op_return" objectively means smaller blocks... which are easier and cheaper to store...
OK so maybe not.
But the SPAM will 'outbid the MONETARY transactions!!!'
Except for the fact that the going 'fee' is 1 sat/vbyte... and at historical lows.

So RUN KNOTS!!!!!!
Or at least limit the 'spam' in op_return to 40 bytes. THAT will keep the IBD (initial block download) easy and quick PLUS reduce UTXO set growth!!!
Those JPEGS are whats BLOWING UP the UTXO set!!
Except this isn't a JPEG it's 4 lines of json
{ "p": "brc-20", "op": "mint", "tick": "BTCBTC", "amt": "10000000" }
that takes up 58 bytes... that COULD FIT IN A STANDARD OP_RETURN???? (~80 bytes)
OK THEN we'll limit the acceptable minimum fee rate to 1 sat/vbyte! That will SHOW THOSE SPAMMERS blowing up the UTXO set!!!
Except when they (the spammers) consolidate their dust UTXOs at lower fee rates?? Maybe the low fee rates help the spammers consolidate??? πŸ€”
But that's an INSCRIPTION SPAM Transaction!!! The spammers never consolidate their op_return/memecoin/runecoin transactions!!!
Oh.

Well this is about Protecting the Chain!!! We can't have it be used for anything illegal!!! OK well... at least anything illegal in one contiguous op_return!!!
The Jury will OBVIOUSLY understand that this: ("questionable" picture/file/thing that's an "inscription")
Isn't the same as THIS: (short op_return)
or THIS: (LONGER op_return!)
or THIS: (bare multisig/fake public key!)
There's no reason to worry, the government is OUR FRIENDS!
And there's NO WAY these people will get it wrong!!!
"Ladies and gentlemen of the jury my client only stored the pornography as discontiguous data disguised as program code!!! My client is innocent of the charges against him/her!!! The data was discontiguous my client is innocent!!!"
After all, since 2009 Bitcoiners have understood that the government is here to help! They NEVER go after people using Bitcoin as money!!!!

In summary, Knots doesn't make any sense to me.
Arbitrary data stored in op_return will reduce the size of blocks, fees are already at historically record lows, the greatest threat to IBD (initial block download) is UTXO-set bloat, largely associated with memecoins which require way less than the 80 bytes already allowed in op_return and widely adopted/relayed...
Every cup of coffee, every 10 cent NOSTR zap that isn't reported for "capital gains taxes" is technically a crime and is illegal... for which the government could prosecute almost anyone should Bitcoin be used "as money."
And if you leave the whole thing up to a jury to differentiate between "arbitrary data" in Witness/Tapscript and "arbitrary data" in op_return simply for running a Bitcoin node...
You and your attorney in court are fucked you are done.
The government can apparently make up, change the rules, issue Executive Orders and target anyone they want at any time for basically anything.
But if Bitcoiners "play by the rules" (whatever those are) and apparently not use Bitcoin as money (most aren't?) then everything will be fine?
Running Knots isn't a solution sorry, it doesn't make any sense to me.
1246 sats \ 5 replies \ @fourrules 9h
Prominent knots advocates are not making these arguments. These are your specially constructed arguments designed as a canvas for your rationalisation. Classic straw manning.
Don't bother trying to bait me into a debate, you can early find the real arguments for knots on Reddit, YouTube, and here on SN if you're engaging in good faith.
reply
I run Core version 27
reply
11 sats \ 1 reply \ @BlokchainB 7h
Smart stacker
reply
I can't be bothered with updating
reply
I honestly, in all sincerity and good faith, haven't read any arguments that are convincing for Knots. I don't like spam and if I could I would wave a magic wand and make it go away.
It is impossible. A much greater concern is the lack of demand for blockspace that in and of itself has to sustain Bitcoin long-term... and mitigate low-value transactions.
[This is not me]
Also
reply
"there are arguments .. somewhere can't link to them, I don't respond to bad faith comments"
LOL
these are exactly the arguments for knots.
reply
100 sats \ 4 replies \ @DarthCoin 1h
Every cup of coffee, every 10 cent NOSTR zap that isn't reported for "capital gains taxes" is technically a crime and is illegal... for which the government could prosecute almost anyone should Bitcoin be used "as money."
LOL you have no idea what are you talking.
reply
Why then is there so little on-chain activity?
reply
Your lack of Bitcoin knowledge is disturbing!
LN is THE payment network of Bitcoin. Onchain is only for final settlement (open/close LN channels).
reply
I understand that... but shouldn't there regardless be more on-chain activity to manage the Lightning channels?
Do you think the fees will be ~1 sat/vb in 15-20 years?
reply
Why do you need more onchain activity if you have goid healthy LN channels? Onchain is a free market, anything is possible.
reply
29 sats \ 0 replies \ @BITC0IN 8h
knots derangement syndrome
many such cases
reply
5 sats \ 2 replies \ @anon 8h
OK... so are those people saying "Bitcoin is Money" using it as such?
You realize Lightning exists... right?
reply
This
reply
Have to still open Lightning channels. Logically if those channel were being used we would see it and we don't. I haven't found any normies who even know what Lightning is.
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @senf 6h
every 10 cent NOSTR zap that isn't reported for "capital gains taxes" is technically a crime and is illegal...
The IRS allows you to round to the nearest dollar, so that can round down to $0.
reply
How wonderful. So i can zap 1.49$ in sats and round down to 1$/900 sats.
reply
Bitcoin doesn't make sense to you.
You haven't shown any screenshot, source code, documentation of Bitcoin Knots.
Don't you conflate Bitcoin Knots with Bitcoin?
reply
God bless you I wish you the best. But you guys will end up forking the chain... intentionally or otherwise. And I honestly hope it works out in the end.
reply
Thank you and God bless you too. There is the link to Bitcoin Knots: https://github.com/bitcoinknots/bitcoin/releases/tag/v29.1.knots20250903
Give it a try and let us know what you think.
reply
0 sats \ 2 replies \ @000w2 1h
You said it yourself...
So who is to blame?
the fact that op_return is 4x as expensive as Witness
But there is no reflection as to why witness data is ΒΌ the price, and whether or not making it so was a mistake.
IMO it clearly was a mistake in hindsight. All the arguing about mempool filters seems to be anger boiling over that there has been no admission that this was a mistake from core devs.
Also, with fees at 0, 16 years in, it's hard to argue we needed the witness discount to increase the block size.
reply
My understanding is that the 'witness discount' made it cheaper to batch transactions... to include consolidating UTXOs/change or cheaper for exchanges to batch transactions to many different users (which they do all the time).
So it was 'more efficient' to pay to many... or consolidate UTXOs and an improvement from legacy addresses (This is just what I have read I am not an expert).
Also, with fees at 0, 16 years in, it's hard to argue we needed the witness discount to increase the block size.
Block size is a very tricky thing. A few years ago it was "wow we need scaling" now it's common to see a tumbleweed/half empty blocks. I don't understand it honestly.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @000w2 33m
Exactly, it was meant to reduce utxo set bloat by making utxo consolidation cheaper. But I think we can all agree at this point, it has had the complete opposite effect in practice. The net result has been more utxo bloat due to all the jpeg spam.
If blocks were still 1mb (i.e. no witness discount), and the jpegers were paying 4x the cost to fairly compete with monetary transactions, I think a lot of the spam never would have happened.
reply
I have paid no attention to this whole Knots vs Core debate that's happening. The thing that concerns me the most is either side claiming that bitcoin will be in danger if this or that side succeeds. Bitcoin is unstoppable. The banks are the ones in danger and probably the ones stoking this debate.
reply
"The banks are in danger..." Bitcoin is an improvement on money. It is an improvement if people know about it, have a reasonable understanding of how to use it and then go use it.
IMO Bitcoin's challenges are educational, cultural, and behavioral not whether we have one autist's filters or another.
reply
Core vs knot I think both have advantages in their own way....
reply