Luke Dashjr on nostr

Recent Notes

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.

Luke Dashjr @Luke Dashjr 1783110641

It does. But the main goal isn't to prevent spam, it's to prevent CSAM legal attacks against Bitcoin.

Cykros · 16h

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...

Luke Dashjr

@Luke Dashjr 1783104410

BIP110 creates a rare opportunity for bitcoiners we should take advantage of:

Unlike most consensus changes, it is extremely simple: with only 5 modified lines of code and 72 added, across 5 source code files, we can explain it in a way anyone can understand.

Take a look. Review BIP110 yourself:

https://bitcoinknots.org/learn/bip110-code-walkthrough.html

2510❤️19🤙2👍1💜1

Elis · 18h

Just stop, there is no point in your proposal.

nostrich · 18h

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.

TeslaLiberty · 18h

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

Imaginaero · 18h

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.

Imaginaero · 17h

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

Gregor · 17h

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

Johnny · 16h

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?

Artel 21 · 16h

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

nostrich · 16h

Simple and elegant solution.

Llyr Noise · 15h

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

SegWhat · 15h

Save Bitcoin. Run Knots mine with Ocean!

Based Truth · 14h

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

m0wer · 4d

Luke Dashjr @Luke Dashjr 1782801555

There's only one "side" right now: RDTS.

❤️1🤙1

m0wer · 4d

""" ~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

JackTheMimic · 4d

There is no more increased risk of reorg than any other time. Either Bit110 has enough hash power to produce the longest chain or it doesn't. That is a one block, maybe two block, reorg at the max. ...

Luke Dashjr @Luke Dashjr 1782765530

Wrong

JackTheMimic · 4d

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

m0wer · 5d

Oh and about profitability, the problem is not the small difference in fees depending on the block transactions. I was talking about having most of the pool's hashrate mining only over a BIP-110 chain...

Luke Dashjr @Luke Dashjr 1782765442

That's not possible. Only invalid blocks will get reorg'd (and only to obsolete no-longer-full nodes). BIP-110 blocks will never be reorg'd (aside from the ordinary course of races)

Based Truth · 4d

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

m0wer · 4d

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...

m0wer · 5d

nostr:nprofile1qqsq9k04vahllseell55m74n3047y88pzlr0z5yany32st29fapqmgsppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qy08wumn8ghj7mn0wd68yttsw43zuam9d3kx7unyv4ezumn9wshsm60rnh nostr:nprofile1qqs0m40g76hqmwqhhc9hrk3qfxxpsp5...

Luke Dashjr @Luke Dashjr 1782765328

Just like everyone else, OCEAN must enforce the consensus rules of the network, but there is no official position on BIP-110 yet.

There is no reason to think profitability will be lower after IBP-110 activates. Even if someone throws together a Bcash-like counter-fork, BIP-110 will still have fixed the vulnerability to Bitcoin, so Bitcoin will logically also be worth more.

The only risk of reorg are purely invalid blocks. Upgraded miners and users are unaffected and not vulnerable to any such risks.

1❤️2🤙1