Damus

Recent Notes

Dathon Ohm profile picture
I'm pleased to announce Release Candidate 3 of the UASF BIP-110 v0.1 official client: https://github.com/dathonohm/bitcoin/releases/tag/v29.2.knots20251110%2Bbip110-v0.1rc3

@Start9Labs, @Umbrel, and @mynodebtc have been updated (see below for details).

Thanks to our many contributors, and to the Bitcoin community, for your support.

Bitcoin is money!

-----

@Start9labs v0.3: https://github.com/dathonohm/knots-startos/releases/tag/v29.2.knots20251110%2Bbip110-v0.1rc3

Follow the instructions here to install this package from the official BIP110 marketplace: https://bip110.dev/howto

You may also sideload this package, as usual.

-----

@Umbrel users may now signal for BIP-110 from the latest version of the Knots app. Just go into your settings and select "BIP110" from the dropdown.

Special thanks to the Umbrel team for getting this over the line!

Umbrel PR: https://github.com/getumbrel/umbrel-apps/pull/4237
Instructions for running BIP-110: https://x.com/dathon_ohm/status/2014371554700718449

-----

@mynodebtc support has also been added in this PR: https://github.com/mynodebtc/mynode/pull/986

Special thanks to the MyNode team for getting this over the line!

-----

A package of RC3 for the alpha-stage @Start9labs v0.4 has also been released: https://github.com/dathonohm/knots-startos/releases/tag/v29.2.knots20251110%2Bbip110-v0.1rc3-startos0.4.0

This package can be sideloaded like any other package.

-----

A third-party PR for experimental @RaspiBlitz support has been submitted. I have neither reviewed nor tested this install script (so please use at your own risk!), but if others would like to confirm that it works, I would consider adding official support: https://github.com/dathonohm/bitcoin/pull/8

-----

With this release, all known issues with the BIP-110 code have been resolved, so your experience should be smooth.

As always, thanks again to the Bitcoin community for your patience, feedback, and support.

Bitcoin is unstoppable, sound money!

(originally posted on X: https://x.com/dathon_ohm/status/2014049821712093356)

2
Pepe López · 31w
will upgrade to UASF rc3 asap. tks. 🪢👍
Ali2k · 41w
Right now we need a reactive measure, not a protracted one! This softfork was initiated precisely for the emergency CSAM use case. I think there is no need to compromise on an emergency softfork. Aside from that, I think the presence of the reactive softfork option will push consensus more towards ...
Ali2k · 41w
I believe there is no compelling reason to remove the 'Reactive' softfork deployment method on the pretense of building consensus. Quite the opposite, the existence of the 'Reactive' option acts as an additional lever, actually leading to greater consensus.
Dathon Ohm profile picture
After much discussion and consideration, I have decided to remove the reactive deployment method and the legal/moral motivations from the BIP document.

I still think those things are important and the reactive deployment may become necessary in an emergency, but I want to continue building consensus and those features were hampering progress.

I hope to have the new draft ready in the next day or two.

Thanks to everyone for your support so far.

2515❤️37🤙4❤️2🔥2👀1👍1
Ronin · 42w
I think a simpler compromise could be easier to get a consensus, something like placing an op_return limit just enough for Citrea to use at consensus level, and the other data limits could be though with more time.
DireMunchkin · 42w
Sounds reasonable. Thank you for writing the BIP. 🤙
nostrich · 42w
Thank you for your work. If a consensus builds around fixing the spam which abuses Bitcoin wouldn't it be possible to make the fix permanent? Because both sides actually state they are against spam.
🍊💊⚡️🌽 · 42w
Thank you Fren of #Bitcoin….
Junghwan · 42w
Thank you for your efforts to keep Bitcoin the best money. As a fellow bitcoiner, I'll do what I can to support that
Bitcoin Mechanic · 42w
Thanks for stepping up!
₿itcoin ₿ombadil · 42w
Thank you for putting this together. I think it’s smart to look at this holistically. The legal risks are real, but Bitcoin users need to do the right thing because we hold ourselves accountable, not because the Tyrannical State tells us to behave a certain way. The economic, technical, ethica...
btconboard #LNHANCE or #CTV · 42w
https://beta.predyx.com/market/will-the-reduce-data-temporary-soft-fork-be-consensus-enforced-on-the-most-work-bitcoin-chain-tip-by-march-1st-2026-1762275376
Luke Dashjr · 42w
The whole concept (as I originally designed it) was for an emergency/reactive UASF. I'm not sure it makes sense any other way. For a non-eventful softfork, you'd want to start it 1-1.5 years into the future. And then with a 1 year expiry still?
Léo · 42w
Thanks for all the good work!
Sly Fawkes · 42w
Shouldn't a reactive soft fork be the priority?
nicnym · 42w
No expiration, permanent restriction of arbitrary data. Include Unix bug fix
bitcoinpoorguy 比特幣傢伙 · 42w
💪🏿💪🏿
ihsotas · 42w
The whole thing is retarded but yes remove the most retarded thing first by all means.
Ali2k · 42w
I think "Reactive" is necessary.
Dathon Ohm · 42w
Updated https://primal.net/e/nevent1qqsd343pq5gwlc90lsyvhw7lsn7t6fkqnnrsv2q0u2v6t4neh6qduzc5phv50
Aaron van Wirdum · 43w
You’re contradicting yourself.