Summary
The provided tweet from @moonsettler captures a heated exchange on X (formerly Twitter) between Luke Dashjr, a prominent Bitcoin Core developer, @moonsettler, the developer behind the proposed LNhance Bitcoin improvement proposal, as well as others like Shinobi and Chris Guida. @moonsettler's tweet announces the proposed activation parameters for LNhance, linking to a GitHub pull request. While the tweet itself is neutral, requesting constructive feedback, Luke Dashjr's reply reveals a strong negative reaction. Luke Dashjr's initial tweet questions if the proposal is a joke and suggests reviving the "NO2X/URSF machinery" — tactics used to oppose a controversial Bitcoin scaling proposal in the past. This indicates his deep concern and suggests he views LNhance as detrimental, potentially warranting strong opposition.
Further tweets reveal several points of contention:
-
BIP Requirement: Luke Dashjr insists that any changes require a Bitcoin Improvement Proposal (BIP). He argues that activating changes without proper BIP documentation and community consensus is unacceptable. @moonsettler counters that the BIP process has been a bottleneck due to Luke Dashjr's previous role as the sole editor. He argues that BIPs are being used for "gatekeeping" and causing unnecessary delays.
-
Specific Technical Features: While the exact details of LNhance are not explicitly provided, the conversation reveals disagreement on several proposed features:
- CTV (CheckTemplateVerify): Luke Dashjr appears open to CTV, a feature that allows more flexible Bitcoin scripts.
- Internalkey: He expresses reservations about "Internalkey".
- CSFS: Luke states that "CSFS doesn't seem to have consensus yet". This suggests disagreement on the specific implementation or the need for this feature.
- Miner Control: Luke outright rejects giving miners any additional control.
-
Data Storage on the Blockchain: A discussion about storing settlement data on-chain reveals differing philosophies.
- @moonsettler argues that necessary data for fund recovery should be permissible, suggesting LNhance might involve storing more data on the blockchain.
- Luke Dashjr counters that the blockchain is not a "personal backup service" and implies that storing excessive data is undesirable.
-
Personal Accusations and Conflict: The conversation devolves into personal attacks, with Luke Dashjr accusing Jeremy Rubin _ of "sneaking in a spam-enabling change"_ in his updated CTV BIP and engaging in inflammatory rhetoric, which others like Shinobi criticize as inappropriate.
Luke Dashjr's primary concerns centre around the lack of a BIP for LNhance, potential for miner control, and possible implications for blockchain data storage. His strong reaction and invocation of past opposition tactics highlight his perception of LNhance as a serious threat to Bitcoin.
It is important to note that this summary offers snippets of a larger conversation. A complete understanding of the technical arguments and nuances requires access to the full context, including the proposed LNhance code and any prior discussions which are all present in the tweet.