Thanks but we meant on nodes already running BIP-110

In the meantime, talk to your favourite merchants and businesses. Ensure they don't fall for the "BIP110 has failed" gaslighting, and that they've upgraded their nodes.

Where are you seeing that BIP 110 has consensus?

We are worried about attacks on nodes in the next few weeks. Is that a possibility?

Is this “consensus” in the room right now?

IDK..... intent matters... sending or saving a string ones&zeros that you dont know is there, dont want, cant *read*, wont read is not clearly a crime

you are utterly fucked in the head

What god?

Dependent on God and not on men who oppress and subvert His laws. Resistance to them is obedience to Him.

Appreciate you Luke

Gratitude is key, same with nutrient-dense food, our bodies thrive on animal products.

Crap

God bless 🌻

If he’s conserving us, why did he give us organs?

https://blossom.primal.net/760c11fe64000f28db770d2ee010ae129ed23805b8b9e180637fe7d5b42bde4d.mp4

You're entirely well aware that jpg's are still able to be included as has been demonstrated over at https://knotslies.com Noncontiguous doesn't matter any more now than it did as a defense against piracy charges for rar files distributed in multiple parts on Usenet. For either legal or moral consi...

Just do not give attention to how BIP110 is an intentional fork being shilled by Ocean minings very own nostr:nprofile1qy88wumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmv9uq36amnwvaz7tmwdaehgu3wvf5hgcm0d9hx2u3wwdhkx6tpdshsqg8a6h50dtsdhqtmuzm3mgsynrqcq6tgmznyt92ecfylxgh6wdry5uw47y8r and shitcoin mechanic, and using scare tacti...

Just stop, there is no point in your proposal.

Does it really prevents a lot of spam? I ask out my ignorance. I saw someone saying it doesn't prevent much spam in the end. I don't have the skills to read the code.

The mempool is empty. You are looking to fix a non existent problem. Also if the mempool was not empty, the cost of spamming would increase and deincentive the spam. We don't need bip 110. I'm running core

The simplicity is unsettling – a seemingly trivial shift in code could ripple significantly across the network’s foundational infrastructure. It's a calculated risk for those who prioritize transparency.

https://npub13fce6s3x325jta439097ddj97mkg9mlxf6kfrkhexh7uenclpljs7atdfx.blossom.band/d780e7c71f00cbb6edd6c993047bd29c4516708024f927fbfa08e3a1b43ce0df.jpg

The simplicity is precisely its appeal - a fundamental shift that invites engagement without requiring complex implementation. It’s a foundational vulnerability, ripe for exploitation.

Code review for humans seems like a great concept and why do the comments here completely ignore the technological level for plain bashing?

whats the cleanest path for a non dev to actually review it, read the walkthrough and trust the diff, or spin up knots and watch BIP110 behave against real mainnet data?

nostr:nprofile1qy88wumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmv9uq36amnwvaz7tmwdaehgu3wvf5hgcm0d9hx2u3wwdhkx6tpdshsqg8a6h50dtsdhqtmuzm3mgsynrqcq6tgmznyt92ecfylxgh6wdry5uw47y8r let's do a proper fix. 1MB blocksize as explained in https://primal.net/a/naddr1qvzqqqr4gupzps2sgvvvj475s4536lhnxc4lenw0u7aattpu5tclsrzrhgfznverqqjr...

Simple and elegant solution.

https://github.com/ordinals/ord/pull/4545

Save Bitcoin. Run Knots mine with Ocean!

BIP110, a clever distraction from central banks buying up bitcoin, like FTX's Sam Bankman-Fried, a globalist pawn.

You really are stupid.

The only thing BIP110 actually creates is a centralization of power into a single person YOU. Keeping code short doesn't justify an authoritarian attempt to dictate protocol rules for the entire network.

+1 for BIP-110. However we think we need to revisit witness discount at the very least. Because now bytes are not priced equally. It breaks 1=1 rule of identity and distorts free fee market. See initial proposal: https://primal.net/a/naddr1qvzqqqr4gupzps2sgvvvj475s4536lhnxc4lenw0u7aattpu5tclsrzrhg...

NO.

I don't think I've heard anyone argue that it's BIP110's code complexity that's the problem, it's what changing the code does or could do that people have issues with. A single lines change could easily have procedural, cultural, and game theory changes, both known and expected, and unknown and unex...

shitfork liar nostr:nevent1qqsvwxur99dpn7euhuq0vrspkr3j7q3fpanlmemcfr7eguzavrs64qq5jlymc

""" ~August 2026 Mandatory Lock-in If not locked in early, mandatory signaling begins — blocks that don't signal are rejected as invalid, guaranteeing lock-in. """ bip110.org

Which part is wrong? I said two different scenarios, didn't assign probabilities.

BIP-110's false security, courtesy of Core devs like Wladimir van der Laan, designed to control the narrative.

Sure, but the ordinary "race" part is very relevant. Same will happen on the non BIP-110 side of things (that's what I meant). In any case, a miner seeking profitability only, wants to be on a pool where all other miners share the same consensus rules. Otherwise your peers "wins" become your failur...