@Note Appreciator
I appreciate notes… and other stuff.
No relay list published yet.
Recent Notes
this seems fucked up?
https://blossom.primal.net/1c80f09784489607cf37e6aad656e7b2257fa43995bb73aaf25dffb2b50852cc.jpg
kind of an evergreen statement. rejecting or accepting code being executed on hardware you own and run *may* subject you to legal or moral consequences always and everywhere.
nope
and having one person maintain the software for the majority of nodes on the network is probably worse than the status quo
nostr:nevent1qqsyhm37kqht0ffwqs56evqdmpjql43g05jkv7f58v4c7gjxn9eerespz...
That’s 100% on core pushing through a contentious change.
exactly, this is my opinion and a bunch of people hate me for it lmfao
Even Luke says to do that, i.e. if you’re not sure about knots, just stay on the same core version and do some research and watch what happens.
Can confirm this. Especially people who are neutral or tending to left politics are really turned off because to them it seems that Bitcoin is a right wing project.
„Most people have either no opin...
Mainstream people don’t typically seek out mainstream content on niche platforms. It’s gonna take a niche attraction to bring people over. Like the Facebook group or marketplace effect. People join Facebook because their neighborhood gardening group is there. This is what nostr could do really well.
thinking something similar to the latter but with more maintainers
Core used to be like that and even the knots apologists like Bitcoin Mechanic say they want to just submit a pr to core and have a good relationship where these ideas can be discussed and worked out. Knots is just the fallback escape hatch. I think core should prioritize working with a large section of devs and should try not to give the middle finger to the more prominent devs with big followings lol
My dude. Will has one of the highest scores on the DBI. He's not a sellout or a bad actor. He just has a different opinion. That's still allowed, right?
Have you seen what he has been posting?
He’s got a bit of the knots derangement syndrome these days though. He is welcome to have a different opinion and even think everyone else is retard and not as smart as he is. But I think he is doing himself a disservice by coming out with insults rather than logical arguments.
He’s got a bit of the knots derangement syndrome these days though. He is welcome to have a different opinion and even think everyone else is retard and not as smart as he is. But I think he is doing himself a disservice by coming out with insults rather than logical arguments.
1
Assuming I understand your question, no the implementation can be different as long as the consensus rules are followed. The only thing is that if you have lots of competing implementations, I believe...
Yup which is why knots is pretty much perfect for this use case since it is basically core and has been maintained right alongside it for the majority of core’s existence yet @ODELL is frustrated by knots for some reason… so I was wondering if he’d consider using something like btcd… but I don’t think he would for the reasons you mentioned.
If it changes consensus then its a hard fork, sir.
What I mean is ‘does the consensus code have to be the same exact code, e.g. a go function that does the exact same thing a c++ function does’?
I know the functionality is needs to be the same to remain in consensus—it’s even in the name lol.
I know the functionality is needs to be the same to remain in consensus—it’s even in the name lol.
1❤️1🧠1
frustrated with both core and knots
would like to see a conservative well reviewed and maintained third option
will do my best to make that a reality
until then i will simply not upgrade my nodes
Does it need to share the same exact consensus code? Or could it be a completely separate implementation like
https://github.com/btcsuite/btcd?
https://github.com/btcsuite/btcd?