Jason

@SimonDixonTwitt Spot on, thanks Simon 🔥

Still think I’m crazy? Theatre.

Soft Fork Activation: Hard Mode - Method: Have support from zero businesses and almost zero miners. Benefit: Reassert pleb dominance. Cost: Spend month getting dunked on by sniveling cowards who wish Bitcoin was controlled by a handful of Mining pools and exchanges.

I’m tired of your insults. I am providing investigative journalism, everything is sourced with screenshots and URLs. I’m doing it because I care about Bitcoin. You sit there arrogantly handwaving honest concerns, throwing insults and ad hominems towards people uncovering extremely alarming behavior and governance by Bitcoin’s reference implementation, while being invested in all kinds of grifts, while not even commenting on fucked up emails connecting you to Epstein’s island. You have fallen completely, Adam. Just sad to see. Now fuck off.

1/ In May 2019 a prominent Bitcoin Core developer called Matt Corallo posted a Twitter thread calling for DEI recruitment into Bitcoin development. The same month, John Newbery hired a new co-organiser for Chaincode Labs' developer residency.

Why don’t they just tokenize the oil in the Middle East and transport it across permissionless financial rails, thereby avoiding the Strait of Hormuz altogether

I've spent the last month looking closely at how Bitcoin Core and the network around it has operated the last years. A blatant cultural and philosophical shift. Shocking arrogance and contempt for dissent on display around the OP_RETURN uncap. Opposition was reframed as "harassment", "drama" and "brigading". Consensus was simply declared, in the face of massive controversy and opposition. Bitcoin is imo clearly drifting towards “anything goes if there is a use case out there” relativism. Bitcoin is supposed to be money. That's the mission. Separating money and state. Not being a data layer adapting to the needs of venture-backed projects. Staying neutral while Bitcoin drifts in this direction isn't something I can justify anymore. It feels urgent that something is done to counter it.

Bitcoin Core Insider Spills The Beans (Jon Atack)

More Luke Dashjr's, Fewer Peter Todd's (Bitcoin)

Not sure if y’all been watching or not, but if bip110 goes live you will no longer be able to get inscriptions mined.

I was an initial contributor to Blockstream and Adam promised me I’d be listed as a co-founder and be treated the same as other co-founders. Adam broke that promise, betrayed my trust, and cut me out. I was never involved in Blockstream's fundraising and had no knowledge or contact with most of its investors. I chose not to sue Adam or Blockstream at that time because I was focused on building Knots and other decentralization tools. I also thought it would have been bad for Bitcoin. These recent revelations about Adam and Epstein Island helps shed light on some of Adam’s hostility toward me and his recent pro-spam gaslighting, but I never knew how bad and how deep the corruption went. Adam should consider resigning from all positions of authority and apologise to all the developers, investors, and bitcoiners he’s misled along the way.

@Excellion Reverse omega 🫠😂

Well, I guess it’s all over now and we just have to use CBDCs and be happy owning nothing.

@Liban_Bitcoin @SimonDixonTwitt

@SimonDixonTwitt’s view on the Knots Vs Core Debate & I couldn’t agree more with him. #Bitcoin #HosKasi & Run Knots

@1914ad Bare minimum

Is it reasonable to expect that a Core maintainer should be a Bitcoin maximalist?

I want to be clear about one thing in this whole Gloria and Core thing. Gloria herself isn't important. It's the whole structure at Core. Why is it essentially run by one organization (Brink)? Why was a decision made in the first place to promote a junior dev to repository maintainer over more senior alternatives? Let alone someone who has obvious contempt for "Bitcoin maximalism". The whole system is captured. The funding mechanism, the management structure, everything. Core is the illusion of an open source project. Knots is actually barely a "fork" (in the software sense) of Core. It's still mostly the Core code base, just sanity checked and modified where needed. But at least it isn't being run like a commercial software by a central command structure. I want other implementations to develop that are entirely separate. But Knots is more than good enough for me for now. It aligns with my conception of Bitcoin (Bitcoin as money). Core treats Bitcoin like a software project to tinker with. Anything goes if it's consensus valid. Preserving Bitcoin as money does not appear to be the priority (even if that is actually the case, the impression is that it is not). This is all to say that I don't have confidence in Bitcoin Core as the reference client implementation for humanity's best shot at fixing the money and getting us out of the fiat system. Core is as fiat as it gets, run in the most traditional way possible. No decentralization. It's run like a corporate software shop. At least noderunners have a choice. Switch to Knots. Take the power away from Core. As said, I hope more implementations emerge. Decentralization is good. And let's get back to focusing on the real problems: central banks, fiat currency, the all-consuming panopticon, and warmongering megalomaniacs. Bitcoin fixing the money is the only thing that gives me hope. Let's get back to that, as soon as possible.

- Learned about blockchain before bitcoin. - Doesn't like maximalism. - Sees maxis as toxic narrow minded gate keepers - Likes NFTs, thinks they are harmless. It looks like we have found the perfect person to maintain #bitcoin.

Why does she hate bitcoin maxis so much??

Relaying Bitcoin Core Arbitrary Data

On days like today, I’m glad I’m diversified across stocks, gold and bitcoin because it allows me to lose money in three totally different ways.

@johnBTCdoe @stephanlivera

It is truly extraordinary to witness the demise of one of the Bitcoin OG podcasters that played a significant role in orange-pilling so many Bitcoiners over the years, including myself @stephanlivera has now decided to resort to ad-hominems, strawman fallacies and recycling the same circular logic "arguments" that many Core apologists repeatedly used to push for a widely unpopular change that, at the bare minimum, a significant chunk of Bitcoiners don't want. And to add to the pile, he's now deliberately taking cherry-picked statements out of context, knowing full well what the actual underlying intent and meaning are. @GrassFedBitcoin said it best earlier today... "... you can straw man it if you'd like... but you're just making yourself look like a clown." Oh, how the mighty have fallen...