Made some new tunes today… this is true ⚡️

It’s not an imaginary unit… it’s a dynamic one.

lol guess how devs were on the Satoshi client dev team???

Just one. Things were more efficient and working great before a massive team of DEI hires needed huge funding from corrupt institutions that hate bitcoin. Plus the Satoshi client never deleted wallets or leaked ips like Core…

4mb vbtyes are perfectly reasonable… we are talking about an average block of .5MB more than what Satoshi’s initial limit back in 2010 when we had near zero adoption. For comparison, BCH has a block size of 32MB lol 😂

Plus you are kind of mischaracterizing the change… the segwitt upgrade was technically a change from a 1MB byte limit to a 4 million weight unit (WU) limit. To simplify these calculations, the network often uses vBytes (virtual bytes) as a unit of measurement. One vByte is equal to 4 weight units.

So, a block limited to 4 million weight units is effectively limited to 1 million vBytes. It’s a more dynamic system that averages out to slightly more than the initial limit back in 2010. Thats completely reasonable considering how useful it is - Thats why it reached consensus.

It enabled lightning so that BTC could scale as a medium of exchange.

In other words you really just need to brush up on what segwitt actually did - it doesn’t cause “inflation”.

lol let me know if you find a block over 2MB… I still haven’t found one. Average is 1.5mb

You said <<< The blockchain has no concept of “spam.” It has no concept of “financial transaction.” It has no concept of “witness.” It only preserves irreversible bits.>>

It’s irrelevant because the nodes decide what is spam or arbitrary data. They decide what the protocol is.

And under Satoshi’s original protocol there was no block limit. It was specifically added to prevent spam lol

The 4mb of data from Segwitt isn’t spam. It’s a monetary use case. Plus most blocks are much lower than 4mb.
It still is virtually the same smaller limit Satoshi imposed in 2010 - around 1.5 to - 2mb.

On the other hand… The op return limit increase from core was not opened for monetary data. It was opened to appease companies like Citrea so they could literally run a “stablecoin scam” and it’s being used for other forms of spam. Same thing with the taproot exploit. That’s where most of the arb data is coming from…

SegWit data is far from arbitrary; it is foundational to the Lightning Network’s ability to facilitate fast, low-cost, off-chain transactions.

And the 1MB block limit was to prevent spam attacks early on in the network development. It wasn’t a hard cap like the supply. That makes no sense to sacrifice the mechanism which allows it to be a medium of exchange for no reason at all. Segwitt bits don’t cause the chain bloat and aren’t arbitrary.

Unless you think sending zaps, or making payments on lighting is arbitrary lol

I laughed pretty hard at this.

Samson mow somehow thinks this monstrosity is helping bitcoin adoption 😅 what a clown.

It doesn’t onboard anyone… who is even using that shit?

I wouldn’t see any value in increasing block size or segwitt discount. I don’t think it should change either. Lightning works wonderfully and it’s not the issue causing the chain bloat. It’s Core and their attitude of surrendering to spam, their resentment of the plebs and node runners.

Thats why I run Rdts. It’s temporary, and stops the bleeding, and sends a message that BTC is purely money, not a place to store data, jpegs, or run scams like citrea’s stablecoin. It has the added benefit of making core irrelevant lol

… I didn’t say virtual bytes. It’s a virtual block size limit or vByte it’s a unit of measurement, not fiat lol. One vByte is equal to 4 weight units.

It’s part of the functionality that made lightning useful and allows bitcoin to be used as a medium of exchange on L2.

Satoshi’s limit of 1MB wasn’t a hard capped rule like the supply… it was a temporary solution to the spam problem to help keep the barrier to node entry low. It was obviously not a permanent monetary constant. Plus most blocks are around 1-2 mb anyway… Thats not inflation, it’s innovation confirmed through consensus.

Like I said before; Removing segwitt discount doesn’t address the spam problem cause it’s not the root cause of these current attacks. Removing the seg discount creates a worse problem… it ruins functionality of Lightning and use of bitocin as money.

Not true… a typical block isn’t 4mb and besides Satoshi originally shipped Bitcoin with no block size limit. You seem to be purposely ignoring that lol 😂

Removing the segwitt discount does nothing but harm lightning and doesn’t prevent large op returns or taproot exploits….

It certainly ignores the “CORE” problem. We need to address the centralization of the development client, not just tinker with weights.