You are confused. “Policy” in Bitcoin is codified by the consensus rules. Nodes enforce adherence to the consensus rules: no mined blocks that break consensus rules shall be added to their copy of the chain. The consensus rules are hard-coded into the protocol, and the version of bitcoin software you run determines which protocol rules you are enforcing. Mempool forwarding settings are not policy, and are of little consequence. Find something more interesting to worry about.

Experienced software developers will remain in high demand.

Someone should make a Slack clone that uses NOSTR. 💪

Amazing. I need to work on this. 🧠

You’re confused because your premise is wrong. It was a change to the default value of a client side preference, not “a cap”. Users can set the value as they please. It’s not a consensus rule that miners heed, it’s a client side setting, which ultimately doesn’t matter, and also, nothing is “forced through” - you can still set a low value if you’re into incentivizing permanent storage of redundant data over optional storage in a prunable (throw-away) field, for some reason. Nobody has to accept the default value.

Part of the calculus for miners when considering switching to Bitcoin Luke’s Vision (BLV), which they might if fees are higher over there due to transactions finding it harder to get included because of lack of miners, is the cost of turmoil and disruption on the Bitcoin market. Degradation of confidence could be devastating for hard-earned institutional buy-in. I highly doubt that anywhere close to half of the network will be interested in the latest narcissist-lead, fear-driven, fringe-group fork. May BLV be shorter lived than BSV.

Bitcoin LV 😅💩

That’s what the Bcashers thought. Didn’t work out too well for them.

Same, SSDs are so much nicer. I want quiet, low power, and fast for something I’m running at home, 24/7.

Yes, really. Decentralization is a priority, so nodes must be affordable.