That's your opinion 🤙

Its never wrong for me to stand for my principles. Especially when those principles are keeping money sound and protesting core dev corruption.

Was I wrong in that I thought it would potentially be adopted by miners? Yes. But I was not wrong for taking action where I saw fit.

I hope you have a good night 🤙

You losing money had nothing to do with me criticizing core devs. Take some responsibility for choosing your own investments.

Journalists barely wrote any articles about BIP 110. I also did not create it. Grow up man.

Exhibit A

I hope you don't have children. You already set the example that it's okay to be fat and unhealthy.

You post essentially everyday about the BIP and act like someone who is very pleased and obsessed with how right he is out of vanity versus someone who is actually humble and curious. You are not tricking anyone. Out of curiosity I clicked on your show and you come across the same way on video.

You are more obsessed with BIP110 than anyone I have known. You act like a child.

You're making me question whether I am wrong to not want a POW change.

Maybe it is actually the only way.

Hard to not feel discouraged after this past weekend.

If you traveled to the island and it came out in the Epstein emails and you owned a hardware wallet company, wouldn't you just simply say hey I went there looking for funding? And that you didnt do anything weird?

Or would you remain permanently silent? I know what I and every other normal person in my life would do. Immediately let people know hey it's not like that.

Don't want to be motivated by money? No it's pretty existential that the people building and maintaining the project have skin in the game. This is the same reason some of the founding fathers only supported land owners being able to vote ideally. They have a stake in the future of the nation. That's just common sense.

It's like having a non land owner childless immigrant who just walked across the border have the exact same power as us to control the future of the country. They do not have a true stake in it so they don't care as much.

Which is it? Can spammers spam data no matter what? Or is BIP 110 censorship?

Most I know went back to either knots 29.2 or previous. But we don't have any clear stats for how many are still running the forked chain. So no, it's not "their" framing. It's a subset of a subset.

"No, I don't believe @NVK had malicious intent with the Coldcard entropy bug. Perhaps his CTO, but to me it sounds like the CTO wanted a change, the company needed an open source win when they were attacking open source so including an outside contribution seems like a narrow win for them. I believe that was done on purpose. I don't believe introducing a bug to steal bitcoin from people was the ultimate plan. NVK has been in Bitcoin from the white paper. He doesn't need to steal. He has plenty."

Disagree that it was most likely a outside contribution considering the way the nym spoke to them online. I don't think this is about NVK accumulating more BTC. I don't think it was a coincidence the bug sat there for years and then only was exploited to a large degree the week of a contentious fork. So he's been there since the whitepaper meaning he is very knowledgable? Or just rich? Because a knowledgable person would have been running key generation off many of their companies devices on multiple computers testing their entropy.

"Bitcoin Core changed the datacarriersize to reflect the current network use cases and to keep the network healthy. Otherwise more out of band and back door negotiating for blocks would continue to happen."


I understand this. This wasn't one of the points I was asking you about in the post though.


"Ultimately, BIP-110 folks were advocating for education, trying to convince people to switch to and run Knots to hinder non monetary transactions. They could have as easily made the education issue to add a variable to people's existing nodes and Core would function as it had previously. It would have accomplished the exact same thing. And it's even easier to do than running new software. Why wasn't that the educational issues? It would have solved it. The argument was "no one is going to change a variable, they'll just install and use defaults". Instead a harder and more complicated path was chosen and to do the other opponent had to be vilified."

I also would like to see more education. We agree on this! The reason they focused on constricting rules was to disincentive spammers. Especially considering there is no real identified need for 100kb op returns.


"But BIP-110 doesn't even work. People still spam. I've seen BIP-110 valid blocks with spam, songs, pics, and videos."

Yes people still spam. This is also a movement about moving away from compromised core devs implementation to a new implementation where the corrupted core devs may not want to work inside the rules of. Seperating those who oppose the direction of the current core devs. And in general raising the cost to disincentivize spammers.


"Could Core be corrupted? Sure. But looking at what Luke is doing, it's much, much easier to see who's corrupt here. Luke is sitting at the top of his Bitcoin fork and trying to control his Bitcoin fork and everyone below him. He wants to be King of Bitcoin. He can't. So he is making his own."

Could be? Yes I think we are between a rock and a hard place. Preferably there would be more devs working on the knots side. I don't know the contents of his mind in regards to the King comment.

"The most wild thing is all of that was predicted a year ago and he's now doing it!

I don't like miner centralization either. Stratum v2 and DATUM seem like amazing solutions. It's why I started mining with Ocean on day one of the company's launch. We need miner and block template decentralization badly."

I also think Stratum and Datum are great solutions. Now hopefully we can convince bitcoiners to solo mine.


"Small companies shipping thousands of devices isn't odd at all. It's the American (or in this case Canadian) dream for a small business to be successful. And they WERE!"

From what I had heard at times they were only 5 people. It just seems odd for a hardware and software company.


"And no, I don't think a nation state is behind Coldcard. It's just a major fuckup being masqueraded as a conspiracy to make us feel better than one of our own could hurt us so badly and mostly because we all trusted when we tell people not to trust. We let ourselves down. It's easier to blame someone else than ourselves."

I don't need anything to make me feel better. The first day of the attack I said the same thing about us trusting too much as a community and people did not like me saying this. Caught a few "you're retarded" comments that day.

Also it didn't affect me. Didn't lose a single sat. I've run multi sig multi vendor with my own entropy for a long time.

"Every one of us that used a Coldcard and didn't download the firmware and test it and run it through AI before using it or recommending to a friend failed. It might just be that simple if we want to live our lives against a trust model."

Agreed.

"Am I wrong and we're in the middle of the then thy fight you phase? Well, we don't know for many years. For now, I'm not going to dwell on it. That negativity isn't good for me or my family. I will use this as I always do to learn and growth. Everything is an opportunity."


I think some negativity, as in reality, is necessary to fix things, but I understand what you are saying.

"I hope this answers your questions."

I think you mainly talked about why you think core is right and why coldcard isn't malevolent.

My main questions revolved also revolved around:

- Adam Back going to Epstein's Island as opposed to just doing business emails and phone calls like a normal person. He also never provided any explanation about being in the Epstein files.

- Some core devs not even owning any bitcoin

- Core restricting the github conversation when they proposed a change to the software that a big chunk of plebs didn't want.

- The slow boil frog scenario where we accept small infractions that we may disagree with over many years until liberty has eroded significantly.

Perhaps you're short on time but I am suprised you skipped the Epstein question. That seems pretty odd Adam Back was traveling to that island post Epstein's Florida charges. And then offering no explanation once everyone found out is quite concerning. I think a normal person would either deny the allegations or provide an explanation as to why he was there.

Did BIP 110 people sway you on even a single prior belief you had? Even a little?

Would love to hear your response to this question @Derek Ross

I understand you probably just get lots of notifications.