@Pledditor @hodlonaut He won’t fork off. He only supports 110 with words but no actions.
English
Cøbra
4.9K posts
@hodlonaut You're free to fork off to your own minority chain. But I have no interest in following you with your endeavour. BIP-110 steals coins. Destroys immutability. Has dangerous activation parameters. All to service a lie about a legal emergency that doesn't exist. Best of luck, tho 🫡
English
@SGBarbour BIP-110 supporters are not genuine forkers IMO. They just want to pressure Bitcoin to change. Once it looks like they will be forked off, they will come right back and try again.
English
I do not support BIP-110, but I do support everyone's ability to choose whatever version of bitcoin they prefer.
Be it hard- or soft- fork, Core or Knots, let the free market decide.
Hashpower will choose/arbitrage whatever is most profitable, idealists will die of starvation.
English
I'd like to answer questions about our work with the DoW and our thinking over the past few days. Please AMA.
English
@MagicalTux The creditors themselves would be against such a proposal surely? They are early adopters.
The finance bros investing now through ETFs in their brokerage accounts are the type to be into this sort of thing when they get burned by a custodian.
English
Can we get some bitcoins back to MtGox creditors?
github.com/bitcoin/bitcoi…
English
Made a Bip110 bet with @dathon_ohm for 1 btc each.
The winner is decided by which chain a Core v29 node follows 24h after forced activation at block 965664.
We created a multisig wallet with @jimmysong and he will be the oracle for it.
Hats off to Dathon for his conviction. We need more bitcoiners like this.
English
@AutismCapital Because X is unbearable to use now. Far too much AI slop and engagement farming from third worlders. It’s a constant assault on the senses. Good accounts like yours just don’t see any traction because everyone’s getting distracted by slop elsewhere.
English
Whatever the algo is on X right now is the worst it’s ever been. Engagement has come to a screeching halt and the content served is from accounts that we don’t interact with. Nothing pops off anymore. Please fix and save us from the algo shadow realm.
English
@VinnyLingham 60-75 range until regime change wraps up in Iran, then bullish after.
English
Bitcoin critical levels right now :
$64k - we lose that and we retest $60k very quickly but there is still hope for a bounce.
$60k - this is the most critical support level of this cycle. A sharp v-shaped bounce here and it forms a double bottom (strong support). If we lose $60k, violent cascading liquidations ensue and you can kiss any recovery goodbye, at least until the next halving approaches.
You’ll probably see a bunch of treasury companies for both BTC and ETH blow up, along with MSTR dropping below $100 if we lose $60k.
I expect a 2022 type blow up if we do lose $60k.
English
@AskerAesir You don’t get to promote node software, have it fork you off Bitcoin, and then tell people to “uninstall” and try again.
English
@CobraBitcoin Won't happen. Our fortunes are in Bitcoin and it must keep it monetary properties. If the BIP fails there will be another until the order is restored.
English
@THBitcoinBuddha Big fan of Luke. He’s a genius. Sometimes he gets it wrong though. I think he will understand the risk of creating a non viable chain and course correct in time.
English
@CobraBitcoin Will be interesting next year when Luke is gone
English
@BitPaine @nic_carter Doesn’t matter how much they dump. Never running node software pushed by BlackRock. Most of the world will reject it too. I’d rather Bitcoin trading below $1000 than having BlackRock exercising any control.
English
unfortunately I think @nic_carter is correct here:
either quantum resilience is added organically in the way we want it to be, or $MSTR and BlackRock will lead on this.
within 5 years these two institutions will collectively have trillions of dollars of client and shareholder assets in bitcoin.
they will be heavily invested in protecting the network from any threat within a 5-10 year horizon, and they will control enough of the network to force a hard fork if they want to.
you think your node sets the rules?
nah son, the institutions that are lined up to market-dump 2-3M $BTC of the quantum-vulnerable fork set the rules.
Laura Shin@laurashin
"They'll fire the devs and put in new devs." @nic_carter on what happens if Bitcoin developers don't address quantum risk. The uncomfortable truth: BlackRock and institutions like it already have enough leverage to reshape Bitcoin governance.
English
@hodlonaut @giacomozucco Respect. I’m sure it’s not easy to backtrack when you had dug in so hard. You’re right. Core has an arrogance, and we users will humble them in due course, but for now, staying on the right chain and avoiding forking off is more important.
English
I had a long talk with wise @giacomozucco today.
And I am withdrawing my support for BIP-110.
I stand by A and B of this post. And partly C.
Something is seriously off with Bitcoin Core. And they are imo fully responsible for the current social fracture.
Arrogance, woke politics, disturbing physical centralization, very poor ability to be responsible stewards of the reference implentation of Bitcoin.
But I can no longer justify supporting BIP-110. I know the people pushing for it has the best intentions, a strong principled base, and a huge heart for Bitcoin. I respect that a lot. But I don't think it will yield any good results, and may actually make future resistance more difficult.
I do not think there is a chance of a fork, since I do not think hashrate will support BIP-110.
I apologize for the flip flopping, and any contributions I have made to worsen the social fracture.
I saw too many red flags, and wanted so badly to counter them. The red flags are still there. But the urgency and rational methods of countering Core's arrogance and lack of wisdom isn't imo.
I will continue to run Knots, and hope Bitcoin will have more solid implementations to choose from in the future.
Once again, sorry for coming in too hot after a leave of absence.
Kudos to everyone fighting for what they believe in the best way they know, and FU to Core for uncapping OP_RETURN in the face of heavy controversy and creating this fracture.
hodlonaut #BIP-110@hodlonaut
A) I think v30, the rationale, the haste, the circumstances, the philosophical implications, the arrogance, the handwaving, the disdain for broad community outrage and more, shows beyond doubt that something is very wrong with Bitcoin Core and/or how it works right now. B) That means I am taking a stand against it C) This DOES NOT necessarily mean that I know for a fact BIP-110 is the best countermove, but it DOES MEAN that I think some form of strong action has to be mustered against it, if Core shows no willingness to accept they have acted recklessly and unwise, and start working to remedy the situation and heal the social fracture. D) As of now I support BIP-110
English
@CatoTheElder17 @hodlonaut It won’t even do that. The chain it creates won’t have much monetary value for people to make use of.
Big blockers had lots of coins, hash, business support, and still lost. BIP-110 doesn’t have anywhere near that. There’s barely even any penetration into mainstream media.
English
@CobraBitcoin @hodlonaut That analogy is weak - the side making Bitcoin more permissive was the big blockers who lost.
BIP-110 is the opposite, it helps restrict Bitcoin to monetary uses only. You can tell this is true because all the spammers are squirming. Don’t be in the side of the spammers.
English
You know what would be REALLY bad for Bitcoin?
If everyone blindly trusted a centralized dev team, bent to appeals to authority and willfully ignored gigantic red flags.
If no one defended Bitcoin’s core principles and ethos.
That would be REALLY bad for Bitcoin.
As in a death sentence for the mission of separating state and money.
English
Bitcoin’s history is full of divine providence. Many things that would have killed or shaken confidence in Bitcoin early on were quietly fixed by brilliant people who, for whatever reason, were there at the right time.
Isabel Foxen Duke⚡️@isabelfoxenduke
BITCOIN RAILS #50: HISTORY OF SEGWIT & TAPROOT | with Pieter Wuille 🔗 YOUTUBE: youtu.be/QNrW4dUc_U4 A primary maintainer of Bitcoin Core from 2011-2022, Pieter Wuille is arguably the most influential developer in Bitcoin’s history since Satoshi himself. After receiving keys to the Bitcoin codebase from @gavinandresen, who was tasked with maintaining the codebase by Satoshi Nakamoto, Pieter went on to implement some of Bitcoin’s most dramatic and influential upgrades, including but not limited to: - Implementation of Bitcoin’s Taproot and Segwit upgrades - Implementation of libsecp256k + Bitcoin’s unique encoding structure for the cryptography securing all Bitcoin public/private keys - The first import/export feature for Bitcoin private keys into Bitcoin (now Bitcoin Core) - Development of hierarchical deterministic (HD) wallets, enabling backups via a single seedphrase and paving the way for seedphrases themselves - DER signatures, Miniscript, and so much more A truly special episode of Bitcoin Rails, this is a rare long-form interview with one of the most important historical figures in the arc of Bitcoin’s development. Pieter and I walk through how Bitcoin consensus works in practice, the history of Bitcoin's most critical early developments, and the key role of his good friend, Greg Maxwell, nearly every step of the way. This episode of Bitcoin Rails is powered by: — Best In Slot (@bestinslotxyz) - the leading API for Ordinals and BRC-20 data aggregation and indexing. — Spark (@lightspark) - a statechains implementation advancing Bitcoin-powered payments. — Citrea (@citrea_xyz) - a leading Bitcoin rollup technology and BitVM alliance contributor. TIMESTAMPS: 00:00 Intro 00:42 Early Days in Bitcoin 01:25 First Contributions to Bitcoin Core 04:38 Challenges and Innovations in Bitcoin Development 06:54 The Hal Finney Challenge 12:16 Bitcoin Core Contributors Back Then 14:18 The Creation of HD Wallets and Seed Phrases 17:47 Greg Maxwell Role and Relationship 21:00 Implementing Libsecp256k1 28:39 Why Did Satoshi Choose ECDSA 33:34 Addressing OpenSSL Issues 40:41 Why Pieter Wrote BIP 66 47:54 BIP 103 Proposal and Initial Reactions 49:57 SegWit Development and Implementation 01:05:39 Taproot's History, Details, and Benefits 01:11:09 Why Taproot Has No Hashed Addresses 01:16:55 Pieter's Thoughts on BitVM and other non-softfork dependent scaling solutions cc @robin_linus 01:18:27 Non-Soft Fork Scaling Solutions 01:23:03 Future Consensus Changes and Challenges 01:25:28 Bitcoin's Miner Centralization and Security Concerns (e.g. MEV) cc @TheBlueMatt 01:34:48 Miniscript: Simplifying Bitcoin Script? cc @Rob1Ham
English