OrangeSurf on nostr

Recent Notes

What are the best ways to reliably store a small encrypted blob of data for later retrieval not on your own hardware and not on chain?

❤️1

OrangeSurf

@OrangeSurf 1780920180

Why does BIP110 permit runes, which are BY FAR the most used form of data embedding on bitcoin today?

1❤️2

nostrich · 2w

Bitcoin Knots filters them out. The question is why Core permits ALL SPAM and facilitates Citrea's shitcoin on top of Bitcoin? Its a rhetorical question of course. Core are completely compromised and corrupted by Citrea, Palantir and other disgusting bad actors, spammers and shitcoiners. As for BI...

nostrich · 2w

OrangeSurf @OrangeSurf 1780680667

I assume you are showing old data and or knots data, not recent bip110 data in this image because recent bip110 data has 0.004% reduction in runes opteturns which make up more than half of tx

nostrich · 2w

The block numbers are on the image. This was relatively recent event and we need BIP 110 to make sure it never happens in the future. A simulation on 4.7 million real transactions from the Bitcoin blockchain.

Based Truth · 2w

BIS and IMF puppeteers manipulating data, Business as usual for Lagarde and Carstens.

nostrich · 2w

OrangeSurf @OrangeSurf 1780670730

If it doesn't fix 99.99% of the current spam, what's the point?

nostrich · 2w

This is how well BIP 110 works, a simulation on real data. In this block range it would have saved 36% of Bitcoin block space. First we fix the big data abuse and then we go on from there. Bitcoin Knots filters will be helping too. https://i.postimg.cc/5yKmm4q7/bip110-real-world-simulation.png

nostrich · 2w

Bitcoin Knots and BIP 110 will limit it. 80 GB of spam is not negligible amount. https://blockspaceweekly.substack.com/p/issue-3-three-years-of-spam

OrangeSurf @OrangeSurf 1780669722

BIP-110 does next to nothing to stop Runes, 99.99% of Rune activity would remain unaffected.

Over the last 30 days (May 7 – June 5, 2026) there were ~18.94 million total transactions. Of these, 10.88 million were valid Runes (≤ 83-byte OP_RETURN), while only 456 exceeded the limit in BIP110.

nostrich · 2w

Of course it fixes a lot, it limits the big data abuse and that is good enough. The rest of the spam we will filter out. Here it is shown how good it works. Also not coincidentally some inscription shitcoiners already moved to Solana where their true place is : )) https://thebitcoinportal.com/live/n...

nostrich · 2w

Core is completely responsible. You surely remember that Core refused to fix inscriptions too. Instead of finding ways to keep Bitcoin money, Core are facilitating shitcoins and spam.

OrangeSurf @OrangeSurf 1780669217

Inscriptions are being used a negligible amount. Runes on the other hand account for most bitcoin transactions (57.5% this month by my count) and BIP110 does nothing to stop them. Is BIP110 facilitating these shitcoins?

1👍🏻1

nostrich · 2w

Bitcoin Knots and BIP 110 will limit it. 80 GB of spam is not negligible amount. https://blockspaceweekly.substack.com/p/issue-3-three-years-of-spam

nostrich · 2w

The corrupted masterminds who facilitated spam and a shitcoin on top of Bitcoin? https://i.postimg.cc/jd9FX0dj/hodlonaut-19.jpg

OrangeSurf @OrangeSurf 1780668659

Everything they did, they could have done (and until recently did do) without any changes to policy from core, so I don't understand why you feel core is in any way responsible. Realistically it would not have been possible for core to stop this, even BIP110 doesn't stop this.

1👍🏻1

nostrich · 2w

Core is completely responsible. You surely remember that Core refused to fix inscriptions too. Instead of finding ways to keep Bitcoin money, Core are facilitating shitcoins and spam.

otto · 2w

FWIW, they changed this on Apr 29th: https://github.com/chainwayxyz/clementine/pull/1241 I don't know if that went on mainnet release (not that it was needed, anyway). Said it on X also: https://x.c...

OrangeSurf @OrangeSurf 1780668143

Thanks that's interesting, ironically by trying to concede to core devs request to use a less 'damaging' data storage method there will no doubt be many who view this as proof that they were indeed the masterminds behind changing policy defaults.

1👍🏻1

nostrich · 2w

The corrupted masterminds who facilitated spam and a shitcoin on top of Bitcoin? https://i.postimg.cc/jd9FX0dj/hodlonaut-19.jpg

OrangeSurf · 2w

When I attended a Bitcoin++ event last year I asked a member of the Citrea team who was presenting whether they planned to switch to using the larger and he explicitly said that they weren't switching...

OrangeSurf @OrangeSurf 1780668034

FWIW ottosch just pointed out that on Apr 29th citrea did start using bigger op_return output instead of 80‒byte + 2 fake pubkeys many months after they became standard.

https://x.com/ottosch_/status/2062895674916581480

https://github.com/chainwayxyz/clementine/pull/1241

Un-Zucker | Content yes, surveillance no. · 2w

Nitter Mirror link(s) 🔗 XCancel: https://xcancel.com/ottosch_/status/2062895674916581480 🔗 Poast: https://nitter.poast.org/ottosch_/status/2062895674916581480 🔗 Nitter: https://nitter.net/ottosch_/status/2062895674916581480

nostrich · 2w

OrangeSurf @OrangeSurf 1780666811

nostrich · 2w

I provided evidence that Core are corrupted and compromised by Citrea who spam the timechain and launched a shitcoin on top of Bitcoin. Compromised Core are facilitating shitcoiners and their shitcoins and spam on top of Bitcoin. I don't care what format the shit and spam of the shitcoiners is. Th...

Autópsia do Fiat BR · 2w

Falta de evidência de mudança na estratégia da Citrea, contradizendo as expectativas de adaptação ao mercado.

otto · 2w

OrangeSurf · 2w

FWIW ottosch just pointed out that on Apr 29th citrea did start using bigger op_return output instead of 80‒byte + 2 fake pubkeys many months after they became standard. https://x.com/ottosch_/status/2062895674916581480 https://github.com/chainwayxyz/clementine/pull/1241

nostrich · 2w

nostr:nevent1qqs0fl0uuvfu8xsa5symdhgamyg3qp3s43lzpnt7hsf8mk4deuj5jwgppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qyg8wumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytnddakj7qgcwaehxw309aex2mrp0yhxvmm4de6xz6tw9enx6tc26fy6w

OrangeSurf @OrangeSurf 1780665079

There was no change to bitcoin core which benefited Citrea, IIUC they haven't even implemented the change to use larger OP_RETURNs instead of fake pubkeys.

nostrich · 2w

Repeating Core lies is a clown move. Are fake pubkeys fixed? No. It is just another exploit for spammers and scammers. For Citrea, they needed visibility of unconfirmed state across the network before it is in a block. https://v.nostr.build/2LlHalFoqoPeziC4.mp4 Core made the change for Citrea expli...

OrangeSurf

@OrangeSurf 1780663540

I keep hearing BIP110 proponents describe their fork as being the safe option even with a minority of hashrate due to the "asymmetry" that the BIP110 chain can wipe out the legacy chain, but the legacy chain cannot wipe out the BIP110 chain.

This asymmetry is real for ANY soft fork, but it doesn't make a minority hashrate soft fork safe.

Softfork nodes reject legacy blocks, so they'll never reorg onto the legacy chain

Legacy nodes accept softfork blocks so they will reorg onto the softfork chain if it has more cumulative work.

Once again, If it has more cumulative work.

Nodes (including miner nodes) follow the most-work (valid) chain. A minority hashrate softfork chain accumulates work slower than the legacy chain.

With a minority of hashrate the BIP110 chain will not persist as the most-work chain, it will fall further and further behind over time.

The BIP110 chain could get lucky and get ahead temporarily, but over time the luck will run out and once it falls sufficiently far behind it won't ever catch up to the chain tip.

20❤️2

nostrich · 2w

nostr:nevent1qqszq8kld5ed0lqzj4d2kt967k3uh8vk43tjzx9nvf820cqwwm9eumqppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qyg8wumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytnddakj7qgcwaehxw309aex2mrp0yhxvmm4de6xz6tw9enx6tcj27znv

nostrich · 2w

nostr:nevent1qqs0fl0uuvfu8xsa5symdhgamyg3qp3s43lzpnt7hsf8mk4deuj5jwgppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qyg8wumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytnddakj7qgcwaehxw309aex2mrp0yhxvmm4de6xz6tw9enx6tc26fy6w