pull down to refresh

122 sats \ 5 replies \ @028559d218 OP 1 May \ parent \ on: JPEGS or no JPEGS... Bitcoin dies without Fee Pressure. THAT is the Truth bitcoin
I'm not against them being able to do it, that ship has sailed, I think in this case the issue is taking this decision about what's in someone's mempool away from the node runner.
I agree completely. Regardless of default policy... the choices for noderunners (with regards to arbitrary data) should be clear, easy to understand, and optionable by the person running the software.
Do you accept the 'arbitrary data' or not into Mempools? Check or uncheck. Do you want op_return? Check or uncheck. If you do, what is op_return's size limit? Check/uncheck etc.
There's also this issue in how core is coming across with this decision. This ivory tower-ism, condescension and holier than thou shit coming from Core is gross frankly.
While I agree to some extent... there is vigorous debate going on in the Github discussion pages (for the PR) and anyone can make their voice heard. There are logical arguments on both sides... and some amount of moderation is necessary.
The best thing to come out of this in my opinion, is the widespread recognition that there is Knots, Libre, and Core and people can and should choose which one they want to run.
write
preview
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @sudonaka 3 May
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Artilektt 3 May
Why am I not surprised Voorhees has his fingers all over this
reply
26 sats \ 1 reply \ @Artilektt 1 May
If anyone can make their voice heard why did Mechanic get banned for simply pointing out Lopp's conflict of interest?
reply
175 sats \ 0 replies \ @elvismercury 1 May
Lopp's conflict of interest is not a technical matter. If said conflict resulted in salient technical objections, those could have been raised.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @anon 1 May
banning the guy who reiterates a comment that was hidden which brought to light a potential conflict of interest is a terrible fucking look.
reply