StackItDeep 🪢 BIP-110

4K posts

StackItDeep 🪢 BIP-110 banner
StackItDeep 🪢 BIP-110

StackItDeep 🪢 BIP-110

@StackItDeep

35+ years software & systems engineering, networking, & security. Christian, husband, father, and business owner. Bitcoin node runner & home miner. BIP-110!

Katılım Şubat 2023
711 Takip Edilen389 Takipçiler
Christopher Wipper
Christopher Wipper@SGTWipper1Each·
In 4 words or less, explain what you do for work without saying your job title.
English
462
9
121
18.2K
Dave W Plummer
Dave W Plummer@davepl1968·
I'm one of the last set of people born who grew up alongside PDPs and TRS-80s, learning the basics when the basics were all there were to learn! Then I was able to learn as I went for about 40 years, just trying to keep my head above water, understanding it all as it came along. Good thing that (a) I always loved it, and (b) I had 40 years to learn it!
LaurieWired@lauriewired

I’m convinced that a large % of programmers don’t actually like computers. As a side effect, are also perfectly happy to throw away their reasoning to a model as soon as they can. I don’t get it, at ALL. Don’t you *LIKE* understanding the magic of the machine? You do realize hand-programming (I hate that I even have to specify hand now) is fun…right?

English
53
13
391
18K
Bitcoinapolis: BIP-110 no S̷P̷A̷M̷ 🤓
Many of us know the entire story, Giacomo is top notch and was the first to validate me on my concern with SPAM on the Bitcoin Timechain. Then you came along and validated my concerns with Core as a whole, mainly the political side which I lived exactly in Corruptorate America for 35 years. Including working for a competitor to MSTR (I know the behind the scenes on the BI vendor side too.) I was super passionate about BI and the data was the biggest issue. Client (front end) Server (back end.) Thanks to both of you, you both know Core is irreparable and we need better solutions, including RDTS/110. But just knowing there are people like you out there working on better client solutions is all I need. We may be forced to have to keep Core broken for more than a year more but the wheels will fall off and Bitcoin is low time preference. For now, BIP-110 is a temporary restraining order and it forces Core to register as a 1st degree SPAM Offender. Ignore Epstein. Ignore reality. Better solutions will be impossible to ignore.
GIF
English
1
0
6
141
Michael Saylor
Michael Saylor@saylor·
Bitcoin is Digital Capital. Strategy transforms it into Digital Credit. $BTC
Michael Saylor tweet media
English
499
455
4.2K
276.1K
StackItDeep 🪢 BIP-110 retweetledi
Justin Bechler #BIP-110
One of the biggest creeps in the history of Bitcoin. (Also pictured: Craig Wright)
Justin Bechler #BIP-110 tweet media
English
20
34
297
10.7K
StackItDeep 🪢 BIP-110 retweetledi
Matthew R. Kratter #BIP-110
12 Attacks On Bitcoin (Happening Now)
English
17
74
251
8.2K
₿randon BIP-110
₿randon BIP-110@BitcoinJed1·
I'm pretty sure BIP110 activiation is going to be a max pain scenario for all: It intially fails to get majority miner support and appears to be dead on arrival but still moves forward with getting a few blocks mined. It looks like it failed. Most people sell their BIP-110 coins when they eventually get listed on small exchanges. Months later someone actually puts illegal content in a block on the legacy chain or there is some other major issue b/c of SPAM on the chain. Hashpower switches immediately to BIP-110 and everyone then realizes holding legacy Bitcoin is doomed and it goes effectively to zero as we get closer to BIP-110 wiping out the legacy chain.
English
83
9
95
14.4K
StackItDeep 🪢 BIP-110 retweetledi
Caylon
Caylon@CoSatoshi821·
🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣
QME
1
16
53
1.5K
No Quarter 110 IQ
No Quarter 110 IQ@FreeSpeechBTC21·
Author of "Broken Money" Economically illiterate. Technically illiterate. Has strongly held opinions in opposition BIP-110.
No Quarter 110 IQ tweet media
GIF
English
8
6
46
1.3K
Michael Saylor
Michael Saylor@saylor·
There are 110 things more dangerous to Bitcoin than spam. BIP 110 turns a spam dispute into a consensus change that would invalidate some currently valid, fee-paying transactions. That precedent is the danger. We should save our energy for threats that really matter. $BTC
Adam Back@adam3us

On the filter fork topic. I don't usually have time, but this morning listened to one of the twitter spaces from earlier in the week, with some well meaning relative bitcoin newcomers, that humanized them, and their concerns and thoughts for why they thought that made it logical to support 110. My feeling after listening, is if these are the people with #110 in their handles, I'm sad to see them about to fork off and get disillusioned without understanding why bitcoin rejected 110 robustly. So here's a more empathetic, constructive higher level version of explaining why not. I hope it's high-level and first-principles enough that everyone can follow. They seem to want to understand what makes people tick, and are suspicious of intent. So, if someone asked me why is Bitcoin important and what is it, I'd say my (personal) mission and hope for bitcoin is to build the cypherpunk future, that "Snow Crash" was a blueprint, and work backwards from there. Bitcoin I hope leads to fully free markets via bearer unseizable, hard mathematically dependable money. Not everyone is comfortable with that level of freedom, but that's my view. And at this point, I believe that surprisingly, even now many governments have come to understand and value bitcoin's gold-like mathematical assurance, a positive development. Others may have milder views than myself, but still like hard censorship resistant money. Because of motive suspicion, if it's not obvious: I hate spam with a passion, that's how I came to design hashcash while researching decentralized bearer money with others, and running nodes in privacy related cypherpunk p2p networks nearly three decades ago. People seem upset about the default op return policy change in bitcoin. I will just assert, there are extremely robust and simple reasons for bitcoin changing default relay policy, and most just didn't do their research, so don't know what those are, or maybe not technical enough to fully understand though there have been 1000s of posts trying to explain in various simplified ways. So that lack of understanding lends itself to shared build-up of false narratives. So here's my back-to-basics higher level explanation. The decentralization needed to create cypherpunk money has implications a: side effect of decentralization is that you can't impose your views on others. The very decentralization mechanism that helps that, is working against what BIP 110 wants, which at it's most basic is a quest to police other people. I understand supporters don't see their intent like that, but introspect deeper. You can modify your software, but not anyone else's. Another critical and incredibly robust technical bitcoin immune system is bitcoin can't have people who don't understand technology basics insist on eroding security, decentralization robustness and core properties. That would end badly, fast, and so people will fight you on that. So the message is Bitcoin respectfully says "no" to what you want. Sorry, and bitcoiners do genuinely understand and empathize that you mean well, have high level thoughts that make emotional sense, and articulate sensible bitcoin-defensive high level ideas, but they are not grounded and without you seeing it, the way you propose to achieve your ideas, hard-conflict with free cypherpunk permissionless money. My advice is to listen to more experienced people who understand the system and why it works the way it does, to whatever detail you want to understand the grounded reasons for why this is the implication of decentralization and cypherpunk money. I guarantee you the developer and protocol ecosystem shares and exceeds your views on bearer hard money (and dislike of spam). You may not agree with individual developers choices, views, way of expressing themselves etc, BUT you also need to understand the IETF-like decentralized technical consensus process creates a protective change resistance, that is highly effective at protecting bitcoin mission. The implication of which is no developer can change anything without technical consensus from hundreds of other developers and protocol observers who are pedantic and extremely knowledgeable clever people who won't let any unaddressed technical question past. The protective change resistance is robust and decentralized in an amplifying way because of this technical consensus. And the many highly technical mainline developers' cypherpunk mission mindsets are probably far more determined than you can even handle on clarity of understanding and views about freedoms on permissionless networks, as many of you are probably still subconsciously inured by the matrix, where they have transcended that, and grew up immersed in it decades ago. They think natively in this space, while you are just grappling with the surface. Many wont have internalized or have the experience to know how this internet physics works, where there is no policeman, no policy authority, just mathematics, free market and hard money. That has implications for your views also, unfortunately. Now the tough pill, which is unfortunately true: If you won't listen to reason, educate yourself, learn, the same radical freedom applies to you: your permissionless recourse is to club together and create a fork. But bitcoin won't be joining it. (With respect and no sleight intended.) Please rejoin bitcoin now, or later if you're not convinced and need to experience 110 forking off and fizzling for yourself to start that journey of introspecting and learning. It would be sad if bitcoin lost people disillusioned due to simple lack of understanding of what's going on there, we're all trying to defend bitcoin and keep it on mission. Including btw the 110 technical promoters, just they wandered off plot somehow. Join the cypherpunks on bitcoin, come cypherpunk summer🌞 in a few weeks.

English
1.1K
843
6.3K
1.1M