Damus
Cyph3rp9nk profile picture
Cyph3rp9nk
@Cyph3rp9nk
I am not discussing the motivations behind BIP-110.

I am discussing the strategy that was followed.

- It should never have been launched when you knew your client only represented 20% of the network and had a minimal hash rate.
- It should not have been presented as temporary.
- At least 2 years should have been spent refining the BIP before launching it; what exists now is only a temporary patch that also breaks things.
- Not telling the whole truth to the public.

The overall impression is one of a complete botched job.

I would say the CIA has achieved its objective.

The best thing that can be done right now is to fork Knots pre-RDTS.
5❤️5🤙1
Zio Mc · 3w
I'm 100% agree with you, infact I'm using knots pre-rdts. They say will not happen a chain split, but it's false.
Based Truth · 3w
Centralized control masquerading as decentralization, courtesy of Blockstream and Adam Back.
TuropoljskaSvinja · 3w
I agree with you 100%. For the record , I am running BIP110 from the beginning and will continue although don't see it can succeed. BIP110 is totally forced and making it temporary they fucked it from the start as they make it toothless. From my pov it is totally anti-bitcoin and anti-human to not r...
nostrich · 3w
- Only 20%? How much exactly do you need? - Temporary is the better option. It can be improved if needed after the activation. - So sit and watch the spammers abuse Bitcoin for another 2 years? Lol - BIP 110 is completely transparent lots of misinformation in your note ... Bitcoiners sat and watch...
hamal03 · 3w
My biggest issue with the BIP is that it cripples the language by removing OP_IF. Also, I don't expect significant gains in spam protection because you cannot prevent fake pubkeys.