🎯
might have been wrong bruh... been digging - not that core is correct at all - but that the issue is more nuanced to parse ... mostly due to knowing who and what to trust... currently trying to grok bitcoin-assets and satoshi's positions on nodes v miners as primary...
Popescu seems to have taken miner sovereignty as the final decider...
but this was based, as i can see it, on his notion that nodes were more easily corruptible (BUT I am currently trying to understand if this was a reaction to core initially iterating the software all the way up to v20 and now 30 when the assets guys were trying to "polish the turd" way back at 0.5.3)
now this "miner sovereignty" vs node runner proneness to corruption seems to have been reversed during the blocksize wars where the nodes rejected the fork initiated by the miners...
and AI is now doing nothing but hallucinating so I will get back to it later...
Popescu seems to have taken miner sovereignty as the final decider...
but this was based, as i can see it, on his notion that nodes were more easily corruptible (BUT I am currently trying to understand if this was a reaction to core initially iterating the software all the way up to v20 and now 30 when the assets guys were trying to "polish the turd" way back at 0.5.3)
now this "miner sovereignty" vs node runner proneness to corruption seems to have been reversed during the blocksize wars where the nodes rejected the fork initiated by the miners...
and AI is now doing nothing but hallucinating so I will get back to it later...