Butter^Fly | Enforcing BIP-110 / RDTS

It is easier to restrict the rules of Bitcoin (soft fork) than it is to extend (or break) the rules of Bitcoin (hard fork). This structure is conservative by design. This means that the minority can protect itself from the tyranny, apathy or banality of the majority. Over the last few years, Core was carefully and slowly corrupted and the codebase modified so as to expose a vulnerability which, if exploited, could lead to significant legal risk for node operators. Bitcoin was not designed or built as a file storage or file sharing network. BIP-110 is the intolerant minority saying enough is enough. No more. This is where we draw the line.

@LukeDashjr Got it.

@_Butter_F_L_Y Doesn't matter

Coffeezilla would say BIP110’s biggest risk is that too many nodes are going to want to run it.

@LukeDashjr Got it. Thanks

@_Butter_F_L_Y Neither. Every full node tries to have 8 outgoing connections. So that's 8 listening nodes on the other end. Nodes can have more than 8 incoming connections, so we don't need every node to be listening, but more is generally better.

@LukeDashjr I will be renting a VPS to make my node a listening node, however : How do ensure that all node crawler websites count me as "listening"? Each site has different stats. Varies quite a bit !!!

@LukeDashjr Hi @LukeDashjr , wanted to clarify : Given the present statistics; we need more listening nodes primarily to have 1. A more compelling case for others to follow 2. Or is it to enforce node filters better? Which is more important?

Lutnick has to bring his best employee in because they are getting shredded.

The first rule of BIP-110 is: read BIP-110

@graveskies Noderunners have been waiting over 3 years for core to do something about spam The time for being patient is over

The plebs want BIP110 to succeed The elites want BIP110 to fail In one month we’re gonna find out who control Bitcoin

@FreeSpeechBTC21 suitcoiners, spammers & coretards are uniting before they all crash and burn

I lost all respect for Saylor last year when Natalie asked him, paraphrasing: "What's your advice for folks new to bitcoin?" He said: "Buy STRC." Not learn about bitcoin. Not learn about self-custody. None of that ... instead ... buy my fiat security. Then, earlier this year, he started endorsing shitcoins that were using his STRC for yield. He called them yield coins. Listed them on slides in his presentations at large conferences. Years ago he actually mocked these as "yo-yo coins." Then when folks questioned him about it he said he wasn't endorsing them ... when clearly he was ... obvious to any fifth grader. Then he did a 180 and started selling bitcoin. I don't care whether or not he sells the bitcoin. The problem is that rather that just saying he changed his mind, he tried to pass it off as "I never said I'd never sell my bitcoin", I said, "Never sell your bitcoin." First off, he has specifically said, paraphrasing, "We'll never sell our bitcoin", several times. You can find it in several YouTube interviews. Secondly, any sane person fully understood what he meant by "Never sell your bitcoin". The fact he'd try to pass that off as an explanation/justification for why he did the 180 is just gaslighting. Then there's the fact that several years ago he actually announced plans to use ordinals to launch "decentralized identity" on Bitcoin L1. The exact kind of thing BIP-110 is designed to mitigate. I don't "know" the following ... I have no proof, but: I think the real reason for the push back is that BIP-110 adoption would confirm that an intolerant group of decentralized, grassroots plebs can take action to prevent bitcoin from becoming something other than immutable money. So whatever plans might be in the works to reprioritize the Bitcoin network for some fiat-centric thing ... can actually be thwarted by a bunch of plebs running software they believe is consistent with their view of bitcoin. That scares the shit out of the fiat complex trying to take control of the Bitcoin network.

Mr. Saylor, we are big fans of yours. We are mining BIP110 blocks to stay in consensus with 100% of the network. Despite your earnest words, we will continue to mine BIP110 blocks unless you can convince 10-20% of the network to switch back to running Core. We have to respect what the nodes want

Friendly reminder: Almost all shitcoiners pretend to be bitcoiners.

@1914ad @moonbootspleb Wait a second, shouldn't this be relevant for ~august 07th ! i.e. Mandatory signalling. Why do I guys say sept (activation date). Real curious now.......

@moonbootspleb Very realistic

Here’s my prediction for activation: Prior to activation: * Anti-BIP-110 inflooencers are going to be frantic until activation on Sept 1st. * very little miner signaling will happen ~1-5% because big miners have little to gain by signaling. After activation: * BIP-110 miners will lead out the gate with a couple of blocks that will significantly impact profitability of the major pools. * major pools will win a couple of blocks * BIP-110 miners will win an additional block * Antpool, Spiderpool, or F2Pool will defect to BIP-110 mining to unseat Foundry * All other miners will go BIP-110 once they see what has happened. * By Sept 2nd, BIP-110 will have ~100% miner signaling.

For those planning on renting hash and wondering when to start, It’s today The fresh window for counting bip-110 blocks starts in ~10 hours That’s Saturday afternoon/evening NYC time

"If I wanted to destroy bitcoin, I would just fund infinite developers who are very talented and tell them to make it better"

- About 90 GB of the full blockchain is made up of arbitrary data - The UTXO set exploded from 4GB to 12 GB with dust - Half of the UTXO set holds dust - Taproot is now the most common output type in the UTXO set, and 90% of these outputs hold dust - 40% of new blocks are still filled with arbitrary data Congrats on letting yourselves being psyopped into non-action by scammers and spooks.

Here's what instigated the Knots/BIP-110 movement, and why its adoption is critical to keeping bitcoin decentralized. Summary video of @kwsantiago article.

Stop being afraid of diversity. We need experimental coins like Zcash just like we need ossified-ish coins like Bitcoin. Your insistence that Bitcoin become a feature testing coin like the others shows your lack of openness, lack of inclusion, lack of appreciation of diversity