Damus
Derek Ross profile picture
Derek Ross
@Derek Ross
Bitcoin Core vs Knots and BIP-110.

Essentially, one is a config knob you can turn back. The other removes the knob entirely and replaces it with a locked box you can't open.

With Bitcoin Core's default mempool policy change, they changed the default value for transaction relay/filtering rules. I'm not a fan of that. I believe it's a dumb call, sets a bad precedent, but in the grand scheme of things, it's still just a default config value. You can change it back. Your node, your rules. Right? That's the whole point of running your own node. You choose which transactions to relay and accept.

BIP-110 is fundamentally different. It's a consensus level change that would let miners censor transactions at the block level by enabling selective transaction inclusion based on policy rules baked into validation itself. It's not a simple "change the default and move on" situation that some think. It's actually enshrining censorship into the protocol's DNA. That's a MAJOR shift in thinking and functionality.

The distinction matters:

• Core default change: Bad precedent, opt-out available → annoying but not catastrophic
• BIP-110: Structural censorship of legitimate transactions → attack on Bitcoin's core value proposition.
6012❤️23❤️3🤙3👍2💜2🚀2
VampireMJ · 2d
Can't wait for a group of Node developpers to be like "No change on L1, No new feature and No change in the settings except for maintenance (security/compatibility)"
SatsAndSports · 2d
This was never "Core Vs Knots"; the BIP110ers will never learn if we keep to that false framing Core and Knots were on the same side, keeping filters that were harmful to small miners, and which were making it hard to run a node (fake pubkeys) The Tolerant Minority are the winners; we stepped in a...
KD 🦘 · 2d
Fuck the big miners.. And if you’re truly a ‘Bitcoiner’ that has UXTOs effected by BIP-110 that you’re not prepared to adjust, bye bye 👋🏻👋🏻
Francis Marion BIP110 · 2d
When you read the word “censor” you immediately know it’s a bad actor.
Jameson Lopp · 2d
You think Core changing the policy was a "dumb call" - do you understand they they were reacting to the network already routing around said policy and thus rendering it ineffective? Thus, keeping the policy in place was actually detrimental to nodes and impairing their ability to predict what transa...
ndeet · 2d
I'm against BIP 110 for several reasons but your framing is not correct. Core also marked the option as deprecated and wanted to remove it in a future release entirely. So users won't be able to set it anymore. They later backpaddled on that due to community pressure https://github.com/bitcoin/bitco...
Artel 21 · 1d
We need a third way. Core uncapping for more data is a real danger because of witness discount. People are paying 25% of the real price for their bits and receiving 75% discount. How is that fair? Knots BIP-110 is a shot but probably at the wrong target. It's not censoring if we all agree on cap si...
Tauri BIP110 · 1d
Are you going to sell your bitcoin if BIP110 succeeds? Genuine question
Tauri BIP110 · 1d
> that would let miners censor transactions at the block level by enabling selective transaction inclusion based on policy rules baked into validation itself I want you to read this again, maybe even try saying it out loud.
nostrich · 1d
Derek is Bailey's bootlicker and his misinformation proves it. Its sad to see Coretards put scammers above Bitcoin Freedom Money. nostr:nevent1qqs8nqjmyf5vgnc7g6pu6cdmcnd5ypspq0lzngdy3f8phh22vgcsnuqppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qywhwumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytfsxyh8jcttd95x7mnwv5hxxmmd9uq3qamnwvaz7tmwdaehgu3wd4hk6...
SomeMushroomGuy · 1d
BIP110 is garbage
Branca · 1d
Retard or compromised.
nostrich · 1d
Calling BIP-110 "censorship" is acting in bad faith. Bitcoin limited OP_RETURN to 83 Bytes for more than a decade. BIP-110 limits big data spam abuse of Bitcoin, it enforces OP_RETURN to 83 Bytes again. Derek is calling Bitcoin from 2014 until 2023 censorship ... that is strange. https://i.postim...
Toxic Bitcoiner · 1d
Thanks for revealing who you really are.
Neal BIP110 · 1d
protocols enforcing boundsries is not censorship, period so tedious
Sourcenode · 1d
I wish you luck in the navigation of the replies to this note sir
zaytun · 1d
Question for you, Derek. Taking the bitcoin *you* love and believe in into consideration AND Taking a BIP110 valid transaction into consideration ------ In which ways do you disagree with the rule-set behind that BIP110 transaction?
Kayne · 18h
Explain how uploading childporn is a valid transaction