JP Technology ₿

Last night, I gave a Bitcoin talk to a crypto club, half expecting wailing & gnashing of teeth whenever I eviscerated crypto narratives. But even before the speech, I was pleasantly surprised how much those I spoke to already agreed with me and how receptive they were to Bitcoin.

@JimAndrews77 @Bitbello I wasn't arguing. I was stating basic facts. You already lost the argument long before.

@JP_Technology @Bitbello arguing from authority and pulling rank. nice

The final BIP110 signalling period will likely end with ~1% support. Plebsloppers who told naïve followers that it would play out like BIP148 instead because "game theory" should resign in shame from public Bitcoin life. Whether it's dishonesty or incompetence, they're useless.

@Excellion "Luke logic"

99% of hashrate and economic value in Bitcoin is forking off. 😢

@Bitbello I knew there'd be one idiot who didn't know the full definition of the word "resign". It can be used outside the context of paid employment. I've been in Bitcoin for quite a while. You think you're telling me something I don't already know with your stupid comment?

@JP_Technology Resign from what? We're most plebs, not CEO's of Bitcoin treasury Cos, lol!

@spoonmvn Really 🤣

@JP_Technology You know what the chance you’re right is? 👌🏻 ZERO

@Sun_0f_A_Beach No, because of course it will fucking activate. The activation threshold drops from 55% to zero in about two weeks. But I will delete my account if the BIP110 fork thereby created is the longest chain with the greater cumulative proof of work. Deal?

@JP_Technology Deal, if you delete your account after activation

@AsyncN8 @TotalBuzzKit You don't know how anything works

@TotalBuzzKit @JP_Technology No thats not how it works.

@AsyncN8 But your own plebsloppers have already admitted that BIP110 isn't about spam. So if your FUD is true (it isn't) we're fucked either way.

@JP_Technology If we lose you are stuck with corporations and KYC third parties. They'll start cramming all types of grift on chain. You're rooting for your own demise.

@muzzrx I'm keeping them around, for now, at least until the lock-in date, if only to be entertained by the inevitable crash outs.

@JP_Technology I want a list. I then want to import that list into X. I then want to remove idiots from my feed based on said list.

@DonalDevine LOL. I've got to give you guys some credit. The creativity of these absurd plebslop analogies and the lengths of the bows you're prepared to draw to connect them to Bitcoin knows no bounds!

1916: A small group of "extremists" fought against the might of the British Empire. The rebellion was crushed, the leaders were mocked and then hanged. Within years, Ireland was free. 2026: BIP-110 proponents are being called reckless, called saboteurs, called everything but what they are - people trying to keep Bitcoin what it was built to be. History doesn't remember the loudest critics. It remembers who was right. Our day will come.

@flaming_hodl What panic? Any gain in BIP110 momentum would show up as an increase in hash rate or node signalling, and it simply isn't.

The panic building amongst the suits tells me BIP-110 is gaining momentum. Keep fighting the FUD.

Let's make this clear: 15% of nodes attempting to ADD RESTRICTIVE consensus rules DON'T matter, but a mere 15% of nodes refusing to DOES. Bitcoin isn't a democracy. It's a constitutional republic.

@knutsvanholm @saylor I'm sorry, my friend, but for someone with your philosophical background this is embarrassing. Bitcoin is a protocol that runs on computers running its code. That code IS the rules. It HAS a community that can only change consensus code, & thereby the rules, with a supermajority.

@saylor Framing BIP-110 as a rule change signals a misunderstanding of Bitcoin's rules. The rules always allowed the network to do things like this. BIP-110 is the Byzantine Generals' Problem being solved in real-time. The rules were always dictated by the community, not the code.

The impulse to change Bitcoin’s rules merely to prevent others from using Bitcoin in ways you disapprove of is statist and alien to a community rooted in liberty, property rights, free markets, natural law, and Austrian economics. BIP 110 would impose monetary purity by fiat.

@BitcoinAnja @ozsats256 Steve Jobs would have handled that differently

@ozsats256 Ngl... I could feel them being SO polite about it, like tiptoeing around the crazy. Being the only girl on the team really does turn "that's not possible" into a 5-minute diplomatic negotiation 😂

Stood up in a meeting this morning and boldly declared a design decision "ruins the UX." Then found out my genius fix isn't technically possible... like, at all... Engineering had to explain this to me gently, like I was a golden retriever who found a laser pointer.

@xcsler @w_s_bitcoin 2018 called. It wants its plebslop back.

@w_s_bitcoin I'm not technical but can tell you that BTCs block size cap prevents BTC from maximizing it's potential as a medium of exchange. This makes it vulnerable to competition from protocols which allow for this vital feature.

If you want to have strong opinions on Bitcoin’s technical debates, first take the time to understand how Bitcoin works at a technical level.

@BigSeanHarris True, because it's stalled out at under 1%.

There’s a zero percent chance that signaling for mining will stop at 5%👏

Just one more. Sorry. I couldn't help myself.

Anyone who gets told "yOu dIdnT rEaD dA bIp" - make sure you read this for examples of motte and bailey tactics by BIP110ers. Reminder: they AGITATE based on spam, but when pressed they pretend it's not about spam and you didn't read the bip!

@QuantumGlowLab Thanks Vinny!

@JP_Technology Good work mate 🔥

If you're up early in Australia, I will be joining this X space this morning at 8am AEST. I will be speaking at the Bitcoin Asia conference again this year in Hong Kong, August 27-28.

@ausbtcclub This IS a step forward. Conceding that there was at least a "small benefit", and that BIP110 may never gain majority hash rate, is a sensible realisation. But, rather than blaming Core for the ignorance that caused "pleb friction", blame the pleb-sloppers riling them up.

BIP110 isn't just about spam. It's about how Bitcoin Core pushed through a policy change that created division across the community over OP_RETURN, despite many believing it offered little, if any, meaningful benefit. Small benefit though super high risk of pleb fricton. Was it worth it? Was it deliberate? Bitcoin node operators voted with their feet, switching from Core to Knots and increasing Knots adoption from roughly 2% to 22%. BIP110 is the David in the Goliath story. It may never gain majority hash rate, but it has already shown that Bitcoiners are willing to push back. The fight to keep Bitcoin focused on being money continues, and healthy competition helps keep Core accountable.