I really don’t understand how this “nodes control Bitcoin” narrative was manufactured

The UASF movement from 2017 didn’t activate SegWit: it forced the miners to finally agree to activate it.

Taproot was activated by miners vs speedy trial.

There has never been a single moment in Bitcoin’s history when the nodes got together and decided to fire the miners or at least invalidate their proof of work

Honest miners in a large majority were always required… and this is the best design. Because spinning up nodes is cheap, but Proof of Work mining comes with hardware, electricity & maintenance costs.

1 honest miner is more valuable to the network than 1000 idle nodes that sync with assumevalid enabled anyway.

I was just thinking that me and Saidedean are probably the only active Bitcoin podcasters who aren’t native English speakers

There were definitely other guys, but most of them quit after a year or two

I’ve updated my infographic on Bitcoin forks

Now it features all 8 soft forks

Plus a much clearer representation of hard forks, and an update on ECX & BIP110

Feel free to use it!

Who is the smartest, most reasonable BIP110 supporter whom I should have on my podcast to understand what’s going on?

Will interview Kurt Wuckert Jr on Friday

7 PM CET / 1 PM EST

This is part of my research project to document Bitcoin forks

But my first question will be: why did you dox my friend Hodlonaut?

Then we can talk about BSV’s upgrades & what makes it different

See you on Friday!

What’s interesting about the two new Bitcoin hard forks is that they are polar opposites

One tries to limit what Bitcoin can do, appeals to virtue signaling & purity, pretends it’s the real Bitcoin

The other adopts all use cases, appeals to free markets, calls itself eCash

Bitcoin law: treat every pleb like he could be Satoshi in disguise