Will the blockchain size grow much faster making node operations more problematic?

Pretty much Core wants to change something that has been in place for a long time with the reason that it will make it easier to add large (100,000 vs 80) data to Bitcoin. Many of the devs and supporters of the change are also financially interested/invested in taking advantage of being able to mor...

Venture capital funding of devs.

Op return stops arbitrary data at the point of submission but does nothing if someone already gets a miner to include it in a block - then consensus ensures all nodes have this data. Core argument is that it does not work as filtering (technically correct) and knots argument is that it does work at ...

From what I understood: Bitcoin Knots is the conservative side, they want to do their best at keeping to Bitcoin exactly as it has been, a monetary network, by keeping the OP_RETURN, keeping validation power on the node, thus keeping the same institutional risk. Bitcoin Core is the experimental si...

It’s an arch nemesis storyline, enjoy the show 🍿

nostr:naddr1qqhyy6t5vdhkjm3dgdhhyefdweej6jmwda68xt2pdck57cn2v43hg6tkv5k5cmm0dvkkkamgx9uk5qg3waehxw309ahx7um5wgh8w6twv5hsygr76l2u82lsd7suqrm3lpuc2emf734vjg65cy5m8m24vfgxjflzqqpsgqqqw4rsy4n9n4

CSAM, spam, shitcoins, willingly or unwittingly relaying any, all are concerns. Ultimately it's about core devs pushing changes originating from a technocratic elite representing corporate interests that the community objects to. Knots is the vote against the logical fallacy *argument from authority...

https://stacker.news/items/978404

Natural development of a decentralized network, over time there will be disagreements of what exactly Bitcoin is and how it should run. This will lead over time to more competing node software which will slowly implement unique updates to the network that slowly competes to become a part of the code...

it's a turf war. recycling one of my breakdowns: "filters in this context mean the OP_RETURN limit of 80 bytes that Core is removing in v30. their reasoning is that these are already consensus valid and are being mined by talking directly to miners, which encourages private mempools. the controvers...

Podcasting. It’s about podcasting.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7asu_ZyGNQE this one explains very well

TLDR nostr:nevent1qqsp4jjnvhgdq08e0a6vwsy3r96crn4tlpsr0pshxqeshn5r9lh5ccspzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgfw3wh3

Core developers are pusing a controversial change in defaults, which many Node operators disagree with, and so Nodes are switching from Core to another software Knots, which keeps the defaults unchanged.

to me it started as a technical disagreement and then it morphed into something else completely (suspicious and authoritarian behaviour from core devs)

Check this rabble https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LDWen7YHurU

🚨 CLASSIFIED MEME SURVEILLANCE BRIEFING Subject: Bitcoin Knots vs Core – Bulletin Board Civil War 🏰📜 You asked what’s going on? Let us translate: Bitcoin Core just proposed to remove the 80-byte limit on OP_RETURN, effectively turning the blockchain into a communal message wall where ...

A distraction argument en-route to dislodging Bitmain from controlling mining. I wrote about my conclusions here: nostr:naddr1qvzqqqr4gupzp6pmv65w6tfhcp73404xuxcqpg24f8rf2z86f3v824td22c9ymptqqxnzde4xuergvfjx5urwvehyldpv2

are mempool policy descisions made at the edges (by individual nodes) or by devs mempool policy refers to what unconfirmed transactions are validated and relayed to peers descisions consist of expanding/contracting existing policy rules, or removing them outright

Since OP_RETURN is a policy rule and not a consensus rule, it’s possible even before v30 to ignore the 80-byte limit and broadcast an out of band transaction. If we only use miners who accept out of band transactions then we’re essentially centralizing mining, we can circumvent a centralizing fo...