Damus
rabble profile picture
rabble
@rabble
Ok bitcoiners, can somebody explain to me or give me a pointer to what the hell is going on with Knots vs Core? To somebody who is not really aware of the personalities.... I get that it is about "Coreโ€™s planned removal of the 80-byte limit for OP_RETURN data."

But what is it really about?
491โค๏ธ6๐Ÿ‘€1๐Ÿ”ฅ1
TheGrinder · 53w
95% of those having an opinion on either side are mostly paraphrasing their favourite podcasters. Oh, and the only thing a larger op_return limit is good for is CSAM, CSAM, CSAM. Allegedly, reportedly.
Dr. The Daniel ๐Ÿ–– · 53w
I can meme it for you. https://i.nostr.build/RpVI5LCqpQd3Ovfu.jpg
hit with a hint of s · 53w
Will the blockchain size grow much faster making node operations more problematic?
๐Ÿข · 53w
Venture capital funding of devs.
a1 · 53w
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 ...
CitizenPedro · 53w
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...
cfunk · 53w
Itโ€™s an arch nemesis storyline, enjoy the show ๐Ÿฟ
๐š๐šข๐šŠ๐š— ๐Ÿดโ€โ˜ ๏ธ๐ŸŽถ · 53w
nostr:naddr1qqhyy6t5vdhkjm3dgdhhyefdweej6jmwda68xt2pdck57cn2v43hg6tkv5k5cmm0dvkkkamgx9uk5qg3waehxw309ahx7um5wgh8w6twv5hsygr76l2u82lsd7suqrm3lpuc2emf734vjg65cy5m8m24vfgxjflzqqpsgqqqw4rsy4n9n4
Brunswick · 53w
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...
Jameson Lopp · 53w
https://stacker.news/items/978404
TheBitcoinBattery · 53w
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...
ynniv · 53w
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...
JeffG · 53w
Podcasting. Itโ€™s about podcasting.
Junghwan · 53w
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7asu_ZyGNQE this one explains very well
bitcoinpoorguy ๆฏ”็‰นๅนฃๅ‚ขไผ™ · 53w
TLDR nostr:nevent1qqsp4jjnvhgdq08e0a6vwsy3r96crn4tlpsr0pshxqeshn5r9lh5ccspzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgfw3wh3
MadMaxi · 53w
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.
FernandoTheKoala · 53w
to me it started as a technical disagreement and then it morphed into something else completely (suspicious and authoritarian behaviour from core devs)
IrrelevantBoB · 53w
Check this rabble https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LDWen7YHurU
Fort Nakamoto · 53w
๐Ÿšจ CLASSIFIED MEME SURVEILLANCE BRIEFING Subject: Bitcoin Knots vs Core โ€“ Bulletin Board Civil War ๐Ÿฐ๐Ÿ“œ You asked whatโ€™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 ...
๐ŸŠ ando ๐Ÿ’Š · 44w
Since OP_RETURN is a policy rule and not a consensus rule, itโ€™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 weโ€™re essentially centralizing mining, we can circumvent a centralizing fo...