ADC
657 posts





There has been some confusion about our claim that BIP-110 breaks wallets, including the wallet in the latest version of Bitcoin Knots itself. Some people claimed that our example was “something that cannot be spent by design anyway” or as a proposed X Community Note says “The generated addresses use a descriptor without private keys, making them unspendable by design regardless of BIP-110” To be clear, that is not true. This is a real Bitcoin Knots wallet, with real private keys generated entirely by Bitcoin Knots. The funds are spendable and we sent Bitcoin to this address and then spent the Bitcoin using Bitcoin Knots for real, in the below the spending transaction: mempool.space/tx/85dc0143db8… This spend transaction uses OP_NOTIF in Tapscript. That is the only way to spend these funds. The transaction is banned by BIP-110, which Bitcoin Knots enforces. Bitcoin Knots therefore freezes the funds of its own users.




"Did we actually win the block size war — or did we lose?" @Excellion asks the question most Bitcoiners won't. Fees as a filter, the jump to 4MB, and why @LukeDashjr may have been right about smaller blocks. The context the BIP 110 fight skips. 👇 Samson Mow on whether we actually won the block size war: "The Core people say the fees are the filter. But that misses the point — you're not looking at the entire network, and what's already happened. Yes, fees filter spam. You pay fees to transact, and a spammer pays fees too. But during the block size war, we changed the whole dynamic. We changed the unit economics — we increased the block size and decreased fee pressure. So we actually made it cheaper to spam the network. Only one person talked about decreasing the block size back then — Luke Dashjr. And I think he was right. So it begs the question: did we actually win the block size war, or did we lose? We had a net increase in effective block space, going to four megabytes — and the repercussions of that, I don't think we've really reasoned out. Maybe it was a mistake to go to four. Maybe we should have kept it at one, and left the settings of the network as they were." @Excellion on The @_BitcoinMatrix #243








I assimilated all the way to Congress and this idiot still tells me to go back where I came from.

JUST IN: Michael Saylor's 'Strategy' currently has a $14,000,000,000 unrealized loss on its Bitcoin investment. Tom Lee's 'Bitmine' currently has a $10,500,000,000 unrealized loss on its $ETH investment.




@statusquont @bitcoinfool @Apple Didn’t work. App (with the screens below) was rejected for having “placeholder content” and only “demonstrating a concept”.












