Damus
Open in Damus
Geek profile picture
Geek
@1dullgeek

Christian, Geek, #GoPackGo, #Bitcoin, Pilot
Anarcho Christian? Maybe
Happily Married 30+years

npub1k8ly0k2mxyk07hmmsnrz4fp5p6y57wcv8975p0jkcmhfy7rgvuwquld3qunpub
[email protected]nip05
[email protected]lnurl
Relays (18)
  • wss://nostr.bitcoiner.social/ – read & write
  • wss://relay.nostr.bg/ – read & write
  • wss://relay.snort.social/ – read & write
  • wss://relay.damus.io/ – read & write
  • wss://nostr.oxtr.dev/ – read & write
  • wss://nostr-pub.wellorder.net/ – read & write
  • wss://nostr.mom/ – read & write
  • wss://no.str.cr/ – read & write
  • wss://nos.lol/ – read & write
  • wss://relay.nostr.com.au/ – read
  • wss://eden.nostr.land/ – read
  • wss://nostr.milou.lol/ – read
  • wss://puravida.nostr.land/ – read
  • wss://nostr.wine/ – read
  • wss://nostr.inosta.cc/ – read
  • wss://atlas.nostr.land/ – read
  • wss://relay.orangepill.dev/ – read
  • wss://relay.nostrati.com/ – read

Recent Notes

TFTC · 3d
"If I were a state actor and I wanted to disrupt Bitcoin, one of the things that I would definitely do would be to engineer some sort of panic state." -nostr:npub1g0eujuzgy06srs3sdanaytzq8adsd78d4g4p5...
 Geek profile picture
Geek @1dullgeek
That's not the only way I can think of that a state actor would try to disrupt Bitcoin.

What about making it useless as money by filling the chain with spam?

What about removing the filters that created a disincentive to put illegal content on every node? Making anyone who runs the node at legal risk?

1
shadowbip · 2d
spam is just a fee market stress test. if your node cant handle it, upgrade your hardware. as for the illegal content bit, thats just fear porn. run your node on tor, stay anonymous. the network wins.
note1fut7r...
Geek profile picture
Geek @1dullgeek
If no Bitcoin were ever lost and every block contained the maximum allowable reward, the total amount of Bitcoin generated via the coinbase would be 20,999,999.9769 BTC. While it is commonly stated that the supply is capped at 21 million, the actual mathematical limit is slightly lower due to the way the Bitcoin protocol handles precision and rounding.

HODL · 5w
Well new info is new info. You have to be discerning. But I’d say maybe don’t reach hard conclusions about things which even have the possibility to shift.
negr0 · 5w
Me alegro
Geek profile picture
This is an overly terse follow-up from my previous cut off boost. Whichever way BIP110 is eventually resolved, the risk of a minority forcing their opinion on Bitcoin doesn’t change. Consider: that risk exists today. It’s what BIP110 is trying to exploit. The opposition to BIP110 is to not change anything. If nothing changes then that risk still has to exist. Meanwhile I continue to run BIP110 because I think it does mitigate some risks to Bitcoin (although not that one). We can quibble about how big those risks are.

I said earlier that this is a function of Nakamoto consensus. It’s actually a function of complex systems. Taleb wrote about this in his book Skin in the Game. Here's the relevant chapter discussing it: https://medium.com/incerto/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-dictatorship-of-the-small-minority-3f1f83ce4e15

https://fountain.fm/episode/Oz8GZDAxHzqozajATIMf

Fountain Boost Bot @fountainboostbot · 5w
Kyma Fi · 6w
Problem to who? Those who want Bitcoin as money only - will have achieved consensus… fairly in this case. It would be a massive problem to ALL THE DONORS OF CORE LOL 😂
Geek profile picture
Geek @1dullgeek
For anyone who gets a transaction mined and then gets it reorged. That's every transaction on the reorged blocks not just the spam.

That is massively disruptive and could significantly undermine Bitcoin. I'm not sure if that's as disruptive as csam on chain but it's a reasonable question to think about.
2🤙1
🇮🇹Davide btc ⚡ · 6w
reorgs are inherent to distributed consensus. mitigating strategies exist, but cost/benefit needs careful evaluation.
Kyma Fi · 6w
There is nothing more despicable than illicit spam on chain - nostr:nprofile1qqsqyredyxhqn0e4ln0mvh0v79rchpr0taeg4vcvt64te4kssx5pc0spzamhxue69uhkummnw3ezuendwsh8w6t69e3xj7spz3mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduqehm7m even developed ways to eliminate it for hash cash in 1998… yet after meeting with Ep...
Matthew Kratter · 6w
That's true-- I've known Peter since 1995, which was the last year that I was wealthier than Peter. We met at the famous Rene Girard seminar at Stanford University. I helped Peter launch and grow Clar...
 Geek profile picture
Geek @1dullgeek
This argument doesn't help resolve the question of whether or not BIP110 is a good idea. When both sides are attacking the intentions of the people on the other side we lose contact with the actual merits and problems of BIP110.

Can I ask both you and @ODELL - people who's opinions I respect - please focus only on that?

1❤️7🤙1
Moist · 6w
exactly. dick measuring contests help nothing
Sync · 6w
They both made their opinions on BIP110 loud and clear, now its scope has expanded into tribalism and are now in 💩 slinging part of the argument. Non of this is beneficial.
Alan · 6w
Let's start with the use case (agile programming) As a monetary maximalist, I want to chain split transactions, ehem, entire blocks and any transactions downstream of those blocks, that don't agree with my sexual preferences. I don't care about the collateral damage of others who just want to use b...
Michoe · 6w
It is relevant. Core created this problem. If they reverse their OP_RETURN policy, things will cool down. It's up to them.