Sabitlenmiş Tweet
I’m not sure why the Saylor announcement is surprising to some.
He’s expressed his desire to be an ordinals spammer many times.
coindesk.com/tech/2024/05/0…
English
Simple Steve 🌌
7K posts
Simple Steve 🌌
@SteveSimple
UTXOracle Inventor. Run it from your own node or watch the live stream at https://t.co/8tVVAlfAns.
Raleigh, NC Katılım Şubat 2018
1 Takip Edilen5.3K Takipçiler
I’ve had many people ask me to explain this tweet.
The key to understanding it imo is this:
The future rules are the current rules.
Luke is correctly pointing out that bitcoin consensus is defined not only by how it rejects blocks currently, but also how it will reject them in the future.
That’s why he uses the example of the block subsidy decrease. Your node runs a rule about how much this subsidy decreases in the future. You don’t update your node in the future to get that new rule, it’s already there.
The future schedule is the rule.
So start from that point and re-read it.
Luke Dashjr@LukeDashjr
Removing rules is a hardfork. That includes scheduled rules like subsidy halvings, and yes, even BIP110. Rejecting BIP110 is a contentious hardfork attempt. And unlike softforks, hardforks need consensus to succeed. There is no consensus on rejecting BIP110.
English
@FlyTheElephant1 @Rory_D_Fpic @GrassFedBitcoin @LukeDashjr Oh nvm I see what you mean. Yes let’s keep the split from happening!
English
@FlyTheElephant1 @Rory_D_Fpic @GrassFedBitcoin @LukeDashjr Right after the split it will be complicated. Before the split it will be simple
English
This is a pretty good summary of how I’m approaching things
English
I haven’t engaged in the BIP-110 war, mainly because it reminds me of the block size wars (a massive driver in me selling my XX BTC then) and evokes a bit of a trauma response
Justin nails it (as usual). It’s a significant reason I’ve been so much more bearish/cautious and sold 50% of my BTC at 80k (obviously my macro outlook informed a significant portion too)
I legitimately cannot understand the counter argument
When I first heard of BTC (sometime circa 2011), it was via an obscure anarchist blogspot that was championing this new decentralized, permission-less *money*
A money that the government could not control. They couldn’t print more, they couldn’t decide who owns it and they couldn’t decide who gets to transact with it
What the fuck are we even doing these days? Seriously guys…
People I thought were hardcore Bitcoin maxis have turned into Saylor maxis
Now all we talk about is perpetual preferreds. Multiple to NAV. USD reserves. How to sell BTC to support dollar-denominated liabilities.
We have some ugly bastardization of Bitcoin now. Some version where the primary conversation *isnt even NGU*, but some financial engineering of some spook’s dying software business- not actual Bitcoin:
The fuck you, fuck your printing, fuck your centralized control— MONEY
I want that back. Give me that back and I’ll get a lot more bullish
Justin Bechler #BIP-110@1914ad
English
Please send this to your friend who runs Core on Windows and is in favor of BIP-110 but is timid to mess with their setup because they think it will be complicated to change
Simple Steve 🌌@SteveSimple
@Rory_D_Fpic @GrassFedBitcoin @LukeDashjr bitcoin.org/en/wallets/des… Here’s the link for Windows download. You can keep Core installed. Knots will open and find your block data the same way Core does. Then will just keep going from there. Remember core and knots are still on the same chain currently. It should be simple
English
@Rory_D_Fpic @GrassFedBitcoin @LukeDashjr bitcoin.org/en/wallets/des…
Here’s the link for Windows download. You can keep Core installed. Knots will open and find your block data the same way Core does. Then will just keep going from there. Remember core and knots are still on the same chain currently. It should be simple
English
@GrassFedBitcoin @LukeDashjr Someone needs to make a video on how to update. I have 2 windows nodes and I have no idea how to update them. A start 9 server is easy, windows sucks ass.
English
@TotalBuzzKit The confidence in taproot op_if did a ton of damage
English
@SteveSimple It is unprincipled and shows utter lack of confidence.
English
It’s such a loser take to ask people to bet on the outcome of BIP-110.
Betting is what non-athletes do.
You’re in the stands speculating. We’re on the field with the ball.
English
Economic odds are “economic” precisely because they respond to their customers desires
They’re followers, not leaders, in any kind of fork decision
Softfork Mechanic #BIP-110@GrassFedBitcoin
Why I think many who are less optimistic about BIP110 than I am are mistaken - The "Economic Node" concept. This emerged as a way to dismiss obviously frivolous nodes that get spun up in an effort to astroturf forks within Bitcoin. Very quickly during the fork wars people realized - "Hey, these nodes might not actually represent any real activity within the Bitcoin ecosystem, they're just there to warp the stats on node tracking websites and make something look like it has more support/opposition than it does." I will point out that that is *not* what has happened with BIP110/Knots in general - those are real people which @start9labs can attest to, having sold millions of dollars worth of servers to people over the last couple of years who overwhelmingly bought them in order to run Knots. That is not fake and is corroborated through various imperfect heuristics. However the point I want to make is that the most intimidating of economic nodes - i.e the ones run by mining behemoths like Antpool or exchanges like Coinbase - are not where anyone should look when attempting to gauge support for a soft fork - especially a controversial one. (At least not until very late in the day.) These nodes obviously represent a huge on-chain footprint, but conversely, they are run by companies who will be the last to take a stand on anything controversial as it has the potential to create drama for them over a decision that isn't theirs to make anyway. However the lesser economic nodes aren't concerned with that. They don't have legal/PR depts or shareholders who need to sign off on these things (or who will sue them if they do something "reckless". They can just adopt a new client if they think it's good for Bitcoin. When Bitcoin is in crisis mode with difficult decisions to make, the institutions are going to be the last to choose a direction and that is a *good* thing. Ideally soft forks to start as grassroots movements, and while the nodes indicating support for them may not be run by billion dollar mining empires/exchanges, as long as they represent real Bitcoiners, the change will be coming from the correct place - from those least likely to be under duress unlike large industry players who necessarily always would be.
English
Ten BIP110 coins are worth less than one real bitcoin
Simple Steve 🌌@SteveSimple
It’s such a loser take to ask people to bet on the outcome of BIP-110. Betting is what non-athletes do. You’re in the stands speculating. We’re on the field with the ball.
English
@TotalBuzzKit I like the temporary nature and I think it should be considered for all future soft forks. I think if taproot op_if we’re have been introduced as temporary, even Core devs would be for letting it expire
English
@SteveSimple Except that BIP-110 "athletes" are not convinced in the outcome of their effort. Why is the fork temporary?
English
Simple Steve 🌌 retweetledi
@bendthekne3 We've sold $800+ computers to thousands of real, passionate Bitcoiners wanting to run Knots and BIP-110.
Anyone who thinks this movement is faked or fleeting is either lying or uninformed.
English
Simple Steve 🌌 retweetledi
@soapminer1 @TheSurvivalPodc @bendthekne3 Start9's company node, the one we use to sell servers and pay out employees, is Knots/BIP-110.
StartOS itself is completely and irrevocably neutral by design. We don't and wouldn't want to restrict anything
English
@SGBarbour Educating as many people as I can is definitely on the field. Speaking of, I know you’re a smart and thoughtful person. Have you ever looked into how taproot OP_IF is used on chain? It’s not just that it’s spam, it a way of hacking around the script interpreter. And it’s 99%
Simple Steve 🌌@SteveSimple
Of the 130M taproot OP_IFs on-chain, 99.6% of them are hardcoded never to run. They are of the form: If 0 = 1, execute X Zero never equals one, so X is never intended to be executed If taproot is designed to execute code, OP_IF is 99.6% a system hack GitHub and plain text 👇
English
@SteveSimple So whining incessently online is "on the field with the ball"?
English
@ChrisMc_L That fine but you still need to decide whether you’re running a node or not and what version you’re running
English
I've been quiet on the ongoing debate of Core vs Knots.
I want Bitcoin to be a monetary network only. It's not possible to eliminate spam, but limiting non-monetary transactions is positive in my book.
I have a problem with what Core did.
They didn't change Bitcoin, because they can't. Nodes control Bitcoin, not development teams.
But they did nudge the network's behavior through inertia. Changing policy defaults without consensus is soft power. It's influence. That's dangerous.
On BIP 110, my issue isn't the goal. It's the 55% signalling threshold. Consensus changes should need overwhelming agreement, not a simple majority.
The thing I love that came out of this: client diversity is good for Bitcoin. Knots is a positive reaction by the community. We can't have one group having influence without pushback. It's a good thing for node runners to have options.
That's where I stand. Money first, sovereignty at the node level, and a high bar for changing the rules.
English
@Sr_11ss @TheBCHPodcast Right so his theory is that some data will actually have more value to businesses and that data will price out normal txs. Otherwise the business plan is dumb. It turns out that ordinals are themselves a business plan. It doesn’t add up
English
@SteveSimple @TheBCHPodcast Maybe he thought that people would pay for the digital ID but that dick butts would be priced out.
I just hate the dichotomy of “it’s this or that, black or white, good or bad”
The world is a nuanced place. I run knots for my self custody btc and own strategy preferreds. 🤷🏻♂️
English
@Sr_11ss @TheBCHPodcast It’s just proof that Saylor is a grifter. He has no principled view when it comes to arbitrary data on chain. If he think it’s priced out by normal txs, then was his plan for his product to get priced out?
If not, then it doesn’t get priced out.
Hes lying somewhere
English
@SteveSimple @TheBCHPodcast Have they talked about it since the “node war” started in earnest? I haven’t heard them mention their digital identity research once in the last two years, and they barely mentioned it when the article was written
English
Facts to get comfortable with for the next month:
1. Is BIP 110 going to stop Bitcoin spam?
No.
2. Will consensus-valid data transactions still reach the blockchain if miners include them?
Yes.
3. Does BIP 110 change Bitcoin’s consensus rules?
No.
4. Does it primarily change relay behavior?
Yes.
5. Can people still use Bitcoin for non-monetary purposes after BIP 110?
Yes.
6. Will miners still sell blockspace to the highest-fee, consensus-valid transactions?
Yes.
7. Has the fee market shown evidence that monetary users are currently being priced out permanently?
No.
8. Is Bitcoin supposed to be permissionless?
Yes.
9. Will the market not X debates ultimately decide what succeeds?
Absolutely.
Softfork Mechanic #BIP-110@GrassFedBitcoin
Facts to get comfortable with for the next month: 1. Is BIP-110 going to have a positive effect at reducing *institutionalized* usage of Bitcoin as a data storage platform? Yes 2. Is that the reason many people support it? Yes 3. Is that the primary motivation for BIP-110? No 4. What is the primary motivation? Disabling methods of data storage specifically opened or cited as "already possible" with Core v30 5. Can spammers find ways to spam Bitcoin that BIP-110 does nothing about? Yes 6. Is spam better fought at the policy level with sensible defaults in the reference implementation of Bitcoin? Yes 7. Are consensus changes like BIP-110 ever going to be a good substitute for that? No 8. Can we ever stop spam completely? No 9. Can we ever give up trying to reduce it? No
English
If you support Bitcoin BIP110, please answer the poll as to how long you have been in #bitcoin:
English
@Libertad2140 What in the world are they doing. Why wouldn’t they just go back in the stands and bet on the game instead of playing it??
English
@adam3us Sorry no time to explain it to you, busy renting hash
English
@SteveSimple No conviction whatsoever. Evidently 110 proponents all don't believe their bluff. With segwit2x and BCH there was 100,000x the open interest of predyx on 110.
English