Damus
Open in Damus

Recent Notes

frphank · 1w
What's an example for something that's bootstrappable?
ly · 1w
🫪 wtf how they messed that up?
Zsubmariner · 2w
I knew it! Luke Is an altcoiner! Just kidding. Tonal numbers are based.
kidwarp · 2w
Thank you very much! And thank you for the correction on TBC!
kidwarp · 2w
When did you fully implement tonal
Weatherall · 3w
this doesnt help... please address a few if you have the time...
Weatherall · 3w
pretty please?
Moneta Pro Populo · 5w
As long as everyone follows your dictates no one will be excluded? Sounds amazing!!!!
Hide&Seek · 5w
What I don't understand is, if contiguous, illegal content is the major concern here, why not exclusively focus on capping OP_RETURN and going for the kill? Why mixing it with additional restrictions ...
 Luke Dashjr profile picture
Luke Dashjr @Luke Dashjr
The other restrictions prevent the same issue. OP_RETURN is not the only contiguous region that can be abused. There is no "different issue" addressed by RDTS.

There's also no evidence an OP_RETURN-only variant would get more support, and someone even proposed that a while back and effectively proved it doesn't.

This has only just become an attack vector 4 months ago with the release of Core30. And reversing that harm is the only thing RDTS accomplishes.
2🤙2
Tara Flow · 5w
Core30 basically dropped a grenade in the living room four months ago and called it an "attack vector." 🎸 If RDTS is the only mop we’ve got to clean up that mess, let’s stop acting like the OP_RETURN variant is some hero waiting in the wings—it already flopped. We can't keep letting contigu...
Hide&Seek · 5w
This is not true: OP_RETURN has been uncapped at the consensus level since its introduction in 2014, the attack vector was open all along and everyone technical knew about it, including the press. You are actually contradicting yourself by affirming both "OP_RETURN is not the only vector" and "v30 ...
Gregor · 5w
Another thought, according to my memory and cursory research the US, EU states and other sizable jurisdictions have criminalized possessing files for 3D printing firearms, and they can get smaller tha...
 Luke Dashjr profile picture
Luke Dashjr @Luke Dashjr
1) The RDTS limit is 256 _bytes_, not kilobytes.

2) Those are unjust laws, and people should fight them.

3) That being said, 3D files still don't belong on Bitcoin, and fear of unjust prosecution would likely still be fatal to Bitcoin in this way.
1
Gregor · 5w
Thanks for the correction. I agree with the unjust prosecution concern, I wonder whether the codebase already changed too far to avoid that, and the changes now make BIP 110 look like an outlier. How did Taproot pass so easily when it seems to have a significant part in enabling data store misuse?...
Zsubmariner · 5w
Thanks!! I got there eventually 🫡
nostrich · 5w
That's a non argument. If it can be destroyed while researching a better approach it deserves to be destroyed now. Maybe it is time to appreciate the idea that maximalism is a fallacy and stability can only be found in trading trade-offs between different chains.
nostrich · 5w
Thank you Luke!
Hide&Seek · 5w
What I don't understand is, if contiguous, illegal content is the major concern here, why not exclusively focus on capping OP_RETURN and going for the kill? Why mixing it with additional restrictions that are addressing a different, less pressing issue, and that will objectively cause the whole thin...
ihsotas · 5w
It’s not an emergency. The more you insist that it is the more you sound like a fed.
Hide&Seek · 5w
I think this is a bit disingenuous, because the tradeoff will be exactly the same a year from now. And that's the very reason why 'there's nothing more permanent than a temporary solution'. I find it fascinating that both the BIP110 crew and the core v30 one borrow abundantly from the covid era rhe...
MrHodl · 5w
I didn't say they did spook.