Lilly

💯 no truer words than this 👇

Luckily, I don’t consider myself a politician, but a Bitcoiner, so I don’t care about the politics or optics. I don’t consider it a clown show either. I don’t consider @LukeDashjr or @hodlonaut clowns, and I take their arguments as seriously as I’ve considered the opposing ones. I’ve watched the Wall Street playbook exerted on Bitcoin for as long as I can remember: forkcoins, altcoins, shitcoins, NFTs, rare sats, and treasury COs. I’ve seen bad actors like Bailey obfuscate and manipulate the narrative and dilute what Bitcoin actually is. No wonder he paid off my security detail to derail the campaign, steal funds, and then publish pure fabrications by the same team he paid off, just to prevent another Bitcoin country from happening and protect his own interests. And to hear Paolo say he’s pushing USD hegemony shortly after, the same guy you crowned a new Cypherpunk, is all about global state capture. I would love to see you all actively spend resources on development and projects that increase adoption versus generating fiat gains by fleecing retail investors.

Just something to chew on.

@MichiFreebird @Singekino_Miner @LukeDashjr @adam3us he has way more than that I believe this was an sold number but still good point

@LukeDashjr has 526 commits to the Bitcoin Core repository since 2011. @adam3us has 0 Who do you want to be the next Bitcoin maintainer? I go with Luke anytime!

@guruvan @KingSolomonMine @brianchoffman @jonmatonis @LukeDashjr some of @LukeDashjr's tech arguments take years for others to come around to realising he was right all along. BIP16 v 17 was one such case.

@r0ckstardev @matthewvuk2 @luca0x46 @secondhq @BtcpayServer love to see @matthewvuk2

Honestly, I was blown away by @matthewvuk2 & @luca0x46 presentation. After installing the Bark plugin merchant can literally accept not only Ark, but lightning payments right away! Wishing that @secondhq keeps rocking & hoping to see more quality @BtcpayServer plugins 💪

At first, I didn't understand this. Why would anyone pay for a #BIP110 template? Well, it's because it helps decentralize mining pools away from dictating policy, and it helps miners focus on outputting highly compliant blocks without additional effort. Check it out 👇

@BitcoinMotorist that's the dumbest comment yet. The larger the group the easier it is to corrupt. Hello- take a look at our gov and the entire reason we want bitcoin as money is to separate from LARGE corrupt entities that control fiat.

Tone is confusing decentralization theater with actual decentralization. Core today is not the core Tone remembers from 2017. It's junior web3 devs who don't run nodes and don't have much if any Bitcoin. They are devs with student loans and high rent costs and don't understand or believe in Bitcoin's sound money ethos. If my choice is Luke or 50 random web3 devs, it's an easy choice for me.

1. Companies that require some evidence when raising funds to get their new shitcoin-on-bitcoin protocol designed to convince their investors. You cannot do that if the network is demonstrably hostile. You can find a new hack once OP_IF in taproot is closed but without Core blowing open doors for you the VCs are going to tell you to just use another blockchain. What do you consider the cheapest and largest? Witness stuff is largely OP_IF in taproot which BIP110 disables. 4) it's not a pet issue. op_if and large op_returns are now officially how you store data in Bitcoin. Prior to this it was defensibly just junk data getting hacked into the chain. That is not plausible anymore. Nasty media stored in a large op return is - and can only be - considered file storage.

@_PyBlock_ @giacomozucco @adam3us @ocean_mining yeah all of the sudden he is a liar now

@giacomozucco @adam3us @ocean_mining So, Andy is a “Liar”. Right? It's a good thing many of us realized that a long time ago.

Today we are announcing that OCEAN’s backend will be upgraded to follow multiple chains independently in the event of a BIP 110 chain split. If a split occurs, DATUM miners automatically continue on whichever chain their own node enforces, and OCEAN will credit rewards to a split share log for that chain, subject to the chain’s continued operation and to our Terms of Service. OCEAN will effectively operate as two pools from the split point. Updated Terms of Service addressing split handling will be published before block 961632. We are building all this so our miners can receive rewards based on their own actions without adversely affecting other OCEAN miners.

With just 3842 blocks (~26 days) left until blocks not signaling readiness for BIP-110 start being rejected, support for BIP-110 has never been stronger and shows no signs of slowing down.

"Perhaps the greatest legacy of SegWit and the Blocksize War can be in the reminder that for Bitcoin to truly realize its promise, its users must remain as fiercely independent as they proved to be in 2017."

Bitcoin Independence Day: Luke Dashjr On The Lessons From SegWit That We’re Forgetting bitcoinmagazine.com/culture/luke-d… via @bitcoinmagazine

GM Roughnecks! We mine BIP110 blocks before it's cool

Luke isn’t the author of BIP-110.. he can not withdraw it. BIP-110 will not freeze anyone’s bitcoin. There is currently 17% node support. The support of half a dozen mining pools is not relevant to anything. They didn't accelerate activation, but they still have to go along with it once it becomes enforced by the nodes.

@bramk It would be an absolute tragedy if miners and corrupt companies funding developers are able to stop a grassroots BIP run by a significant amount of nodes with no URSF opposition.

@Anton__BTC PyBLØCK has been signaling #BIP110 since January 2026 because, obviously, Bitcoin is money. But PyBLØCK is not just an endpoint; our latest developments from recent months—such as CHIRP, Template Suppliers, Carousel, and SV2-BIP110—will be the subject of study for years to come.

@MarkArtymko @giacomozucco @adam3us lying- he has been lying for a long time

@giacomozucco @adam3us (Or just confused)

For anyone interested about the truth: Adam Back is absolutely, overtly and veritably lying about me *ever* supporting BIP110, or even being "a fence sitter" about it. I have always strongly, clearly and unequivocally opposed any similar fork proposal since the very earliest suggestions. I have always been, and remain, consistently opposed to: - using consensus rules to tackle specific types of onchain spam, - defensively addressing any kind of "illegal data" moral panic in any possible way (mempool policies included), - enforcing any controversial consensus change (including the ones I agree with, unlike this one) without clear full-ecosystem agreement. It's a bit unfortunate that a very influential voice in the industry is lying about me, since I have a smaller reach to debunk him. Maybe some of you can help me by spreading the correction. Thanks.

@MichaelDunwort1 @_BitcoinMatrix @CedYoungelman He has always advocated for users as well as mining decentralisation

Luke’s the smartest voice and it’s super easy to see that. - No alterior bags he needs to pedal in a thinly veiled way. - Experience - Values Overall, you always want to optimise for predictability in a system. Knowing the developers value framework (Christianity) increases the predictability and accountability.

@btcefe @coinjoined 🪦

Today is a very sad day for me. One of my life's pleasures has come to an end. Bye bye 'stfu chris', you will be missed big dawg 🕯️ Let's take one last look at the 'stfu chris's and remember the beautiful memories 🥲 @coinjoined 💔

OCEAN remains only a coordinator - but a coordinator that protects BIP110-ready Bitcoin miners from the consequences of other miners’ failure to upgrade. After BIP110 activation, miners who do not upgrade will make invalid blocks and not be rewarded in blocks mined by BIP110-ready miners (only in invalid blocks that have no value). OCEAN’s split handling means they bear that risk themselves, not by diluting miners who enforce Bitcoin’s rules.