pull down to refresh

On day 2 of Bitcoin amsterdam, Peter McCormack called Bitcoin Knots “Retards”. What do you think?
50 sats \ 9 replies \ @jasonb 14h
Most of these past months, I've been thinking, "this is a smart people thing, so as a dumb dumb, I'll wait and see if I ever understand it before having an opinion." I think that's starting to change.
I listened to a talk by Mechanic last week in which he mentioned that, in addition to the blockchain getting too big for normal plebs to store, we'll all end up storing porn and sitcoms and other things that, at least personally, I want nothing to do with. The scary thing is, the Core side all argue that this will just happen anyway, whether or not Op_Return limits get blown up. Have I understood this correctly? This is a very discouraging counterargument.
I'm also a little surprised that no one has yet connected the dots of this with the general consensus that old holders are the big sellers in this draw down. I can't be the first person to have this idea, right? To clarify, I'm suggesting that the curious recent price action of bitcoin is not OGs cashing in, but maybe some OGs getting disillusioned with bitcoin. Is this plausible? If so, this debate or fork or war or whatever else all needs to get resolved before NGU ever again.
To further clarify, I'm not disillusioned with bitcoin, but I'm not an OG. I just wanted to throw this last statement out there to recognize this theory as potential, but not intentional FUD.

As a knuckle dragging pleb, that's my personal take on the smartsy stuff. If you actually meant, which side has more weirdos? ...well yes, it appears that Knots does.
reply
400 sats \ 2 replies \ @Murch 9h
Hey Jason, perhaps it isn’t clear, but the block weight limit has not changed and is not expected to change. Today, just as any day since segwit activated, the blockchain cannot grow more than 4 MB per block, but in reality, it grows by about 1.6 MB per block. If people put a lot of OP_RETURN data, it would grow closer to 1 MB per block, because output data does not get the witness discount. For all of these reasons, the concern that the blockchain will grow faster due to this mempool policy change is easily dismissed — it’s simply untenable.
As to whether porn will be stored on the blockchain, there has been smut and illegal content on the blockchain for over a decade. It’s an obvious result of a censorship resistant append-only data structure with open write access. You may understand then why that doesn’t keep people awake at night, and why it is hard to admit it as a some sort of changed reality. On the other hand, concern about sitcoms getting stored is just absurd. Even while feerates are pretty low now, blockspace is strictly limited (as described above), and if anyone added to the current demand by trying to store big data files, demand would immediately exceed the blockspace production. As you’d expect, the feerates would shoot up, and storing large amounts of data would be prohibitively expensive. While payment transactions would also get more expensive, they are generally tiny and people would be easily able to outbid other demand for urgent transactions. This dynamic in addition to the initial hype having tapered off, is why all the “NFTs on Bitcoin” crap is at a fraction of its ATH prices: the scarcity of blockspace makes it unsustainably expensive in the long run.
So, in my humble opinion, Mechanic has worked himself up over discovering how things always have been, but ymmv.
reply
21 sats \ 0 replies \ @jasonb 8h
Yeah, thanks again. A lot to chew on here…including things that once made total sense to me, yet the debate has kind of got me to forget.
reply
21 sats \ 0 replies \ @jasonb 8h
Thanks for this. I’m tracking. I’m still not tracking enough to update to core 30 yet, but enough to shut up and listen again for a while.
reply
To clarify, I'm suggesting that the curious recent price action of bitcoin is not OGs cashing in, but maybe some OGs getting disillusioned with bitcoin. Is this plausible? If so, this debate or fork or war or whatever else all needs to get resolved before NGU ever again.
after 10+ years, what disillusionment do you think would come to pass? maybe they're just getting ready to buy a house and make a baby
reply
0 sats \ 3 replies \ @jasonb 12h
Yeah, I mean that’s the general consensus. But what if they’re disillusioned because plebs can’t run nodes anymore or the attack surface is bigger because offensive stuff is on the blockchain or they themselves are offended by stuff they don’t want to host? Thats my alternative theory. Don't know if its true, just cant help but think these are some possibilities.
reply
re "plebs can’t run nodes anymore"
plebs can run utreexo fully validating nodes.
#ReleaseTheFiles Luke! 🫵🏼🎄✖️⭕
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @jasonb 10h
Gotta admit, after reading that whole linked comment, I still have no clue what utreexo is. Was I supposed to read the medium link in there? Is there a utreexo for dummies guide?
reply
for dummies guide?
the link there was a utreexo eli5. pretty close.
utreexo team is epitome of underpromise and overdeliver.
Luke won't even admit what he's been working on as of november, totally clammed up. I guess he wants to blindside core ... or something.
there's plenty of other devs working on utreexo.
but no one is as competent / efficient as LukeDashJr.
Totally lopsided narrative and I don't understand the half of it.
reply
I don't know who is an "OG" for you... But I can tell you that I know quite some real OGs (they started way before me) that you will not see them online and they are not selling any sat. And they have a lot of BTC, that you can't even imagine.
OGs will never sell and will always stay with Bitcoin. You were manipulated with that false information that "OGs are disillusioned and are selling"
reply
42 sats \ 1 reply \ @88b0c423eb 15h
Hard to tell, we need more time. It's hard to say when people like Nick Szabo that knows much more than the average pleb is supporting knots, but still very smart people make big mistakes. Luke of course acts very weird sometimes and have very strange ideas. I think the truth is in the middle knots folks got some things right, but bip 444 is totally retarted the same way that core folks are retarted when uplifting the opreturn limit
reply
he's acting retarded, because Knots fork attack was never about stopping spam to begin with, let alone solving the issue of illegal content (CSAM) - neither knots nor core actually help with that. Luke is saving bicoin by threatening to destroy it.
"a private Knots fork with utreexo -- batteries included, fully regression tested, and from the rumors I have heard massively more performant tuned than libfloresta, whatever Tadge Dryja originally produced, and the various other test clients like mit-dci/utreexo which I guess was in go. It's possible Luke has been working on this since he had the lightbulb about making segwit a softfork"
#ReleaseTheFiles 🫵🏼🎄✖️⭕
I don't think mechanic believes the fork exists, either that or that he is being used. Kratter probably knows and is playing along.
Szabo / Samson Mao, hard to say. Probably some PR angle for Jan3. But I would assume almost everybody on the inside knows by now.
reply
42 sats \ 0 replies \ @OT 15h
He wasn't saying that when he had Mechanic on his show last year.
To be fair Mechanic may not have even been running Knots at the time and a lot has happened since.
reply
well...
reply