₿it⚡️Dov

Note to self: Nunca se esqueça, #Bitcoin não é meio de troca ou dinheiro. Bitcoin é uma ferramenta para trazer liberdade às mãos dos indivíduos. Bitcoin é um gigante neutro que serve o indivíduo. Bitcoin não é uma tecnologia substituível, é uma revolução pacífica em andamento. ☮️

Drop your childhood celebrity crush using only a gif

@tutututututs @choqueibtc Não tem o que ser contra, não tem absolutamente nada. É um blefe de uma minoria cringe. Quem cair na deles, vai se ferrar.

@bitdov @choqueibtc SOU CONTRA!!!

🚨URGENTE: O Bitcoin está caminhando para um dos momentos mais tensos de sua história técnica. O BIP-110 tem prazo decisivo no início de agosto de 2026 e a comunidade está dividida como não se via desde a block size war de 2017. Segue o Fio 👇

@tutututututs @choqueibtc Ninguém em são consciência é a favor dessa parada. Não vai acontecer absolutamente nada pra quem não fizer nada. É só seguir fazendo o q vc faz sempre e ignorar totalmente isso. Cuidado com golpes que vão tentar roubar suas moedas falando de fork e pedindo pra colocar a seed, etc

@choqueibtc O @bitdov é contra ou a favor? Sou burro, vou imitar ele!!!

@paulhewsonfps Não se preocupe com isso, não mexa com isso, siga fazendo sua custódia segura como sempre. Cuidado com possíveis golpes, não tente pegar moeda de fork com qualquer programa ou site porque é cilada. Só siga fazendo o que você sempre fez com as ferramentas/software q vc usa hoje

@bitdov Dov, uma dúvida, por favor. Faço auto custódia e apenas compro de tempos em tempos. As vezes na Bipa, quando valores menores, as vezes na stackfy ou S2S. Preciso me preocupar com isso? Posso continuar comprando nesses canais? Em suma, posso continuar como estou agr?

Minha sugestão: Aguarde. Não faça nada com pressa. E meu toque que ninguém te toca: Se você entrar em uma exchange com KYC com suas moedas de fork, estará doxxando seu stack de BTC na rede Bitcoin de verdade. Faça com cabeça, sem pressa, sem consolidar, sem KYC. Paciência.

@ck_SNARKs @adam3us Good thing about nostr is that he cannot delete the message. Once propagated, it will be always available and cryptographically signed with his key

@adam3us primal.net/e/nevent1qqstd…

Sir….

@elfel1 @AntSpeaks This is their job. Paid "crisis actors". They are well paid to do this kind of job while traveling the world promoting causes for their patrons.

@AntSpeaks I don't understand most of these protesters. Don't they have jobs? Families? Don't they do other things besides virtue signaling?

This parasite has crawled out of its cave yet again. This time, she is protesting in Germany over the usual unsubstantiated claims of “genocide” and “apartheid” directed at Israel. Shouldn't she be busy planning a flotilla trip to Iran at this point? What's stopping her from jumping on a little boat and trying to cross the Strait of Hormuz? I'm sure it has nothing to do with the fact that, when she organises these trips to “break the siege” in Gaza, she knows full well that she won't be harmed by the IDF.

@MDBitcoin Bitcoin is for enemies. Infighting is inevitable. It has always been like this, since inception. There will always be obnoxious people doing TMZ Style reporting on Bitcoin, and sociopaths trying to move a herd to their pockets. Sometimes it's clear, sometimes you're the herd.

Bitcoin infighting makes me lose a little faith in humanity. Since 2018, I have held Bitcoiners to a higher standard than most people. Not because we were perfect, but because I believed we shared something deeper than price. -Proof of work. -Personal responsibility. -Truth over popularity. -Long-term thinking. -Sovereignty. The willingness to stand alone when the crowd was wrong. I thought those values would make us harder to divide. Instead, the infighting has reminded me that Bitcoiners are still human. We are still vulnerable to ego, status, fear, tribalism, social pressure, and the need to be seen as right. Maybe that is the real psyop. Not to attack Bitcoin directly, but to turn the people defending it against one another. To make every disagreement feel existential. To turn nuance into betrayal. To replace honest debate with factions, purity tests, and personal destruction. Maybe our responsibility is to become more like the thing we claim to understand. Less reactive and obsessed with winning social battles. More committed to truth, patience, and proof of work. Bitcoin may be incorruptible. Humans are not. That is why the human layer remains the easiest layer to attack.

@AutisticHODL @bitcoindudebro @HornetNode @BtcCommons After the current debate and seeing Luke's true face, anything other than stuff done by that actor is better

@bitcoindudebro @HornetNode @BtcCommons Are these trusted alternatives though? Honestly I’m not smart enough to determine what to run and I have to trust in the developers. That’s not a great position to be in, but if you don’t have the technical prowess, how are you supposed to choose without some element of trust?

If BIP-110 succeeds in decentralizing Bitcoin implementations beyond Core, then I think that’s a win. I’m not saying Knots is the answer. I know it’s hard to break away from preprogrammed binary outcome thinking.

@btcp2pcash @w_s_bitcoin @stephanlivera @Princey21M BTC HODLrs don't support no BIP-110 "Emergency Act to Protect You from 'Illegal Data'(sic)" BS

@w_s_bitcoin @stephanlivera @Princey21M your economic support is the usd dollar or what exactly?

I don't know who needs to hear this, but..... Trying to peer-pressure or gaslight people into degenerate behaviour such as gambling is a really bad look. That said. Have a great day.

@stephanlivera Dude is a quack. He took the top of the UTXO set, and ignored v30 (as well as hype of tokens dying) is starting to make effect in this aspect as well. Relaxed op_return is to reduce UTXO set exactly.

The Luke Dashjr/Knots/BIP110 narrative is that Bitcoin Core should have implemented much stricter relay filters (including on the inscription envelope) in early 2023 and this would have stopped the ordinals, inscriptions, and BRC-20 driven UTXO bloat. Reality is more nuanced. Even if Core had shipped a new default filter against inscriptions, it wouldn’t have stopped them. Older nodes would still relay the transactions and miners could accept them via direct submission. Once real economic incentives appeared, mere relay policy changes in Core weren’t enough. By mid 2024, Libre Relay (and similar permissive approaches) made the point academic anyway. It is more permissive and ensures propagation to willing miners. Relay filters don't override strong market demand in a permissionless system. Since then, the hype peaked, fees rationed space at times, and the UTXO set has since stabilized somewhat as the mania faded. Bottom line: It’s not correct to blame Core devs for what happened with ordinals. They didn’t have the power to stop it on a decentralized network.

@taylor_edw64306 Não use sua hardwallet com nenhuma carteira relacionada com fork, grande chance de ser golpe. Mesmo se você não precisar inserir seed, ao fazer transferência você pode estar assinando uma transação que envia seu BTC de verdade. No caso da trezor, use somente Trezor Suite.

@bitdov Dov, supondo que apareça uma wallet nova que aceite o fork do btc sem expor as palavras chave da trezor, exmplo a metamask, consigo atrelar a trezor na metamask apenas para assinar a transação onde nao foi digitado as palavras chave, valeria a pena sacar as moedas do fork?

@FieldNas What you fail to grok is that it already failed and the actors still playing this game are the "rogue actors" that will create a the shitcoin fork.

@bitdov That's exactly what I said in the OP.

For all the coretards sending panic into the hearts of hodlers over a chain-split, listen, BIP-110 will win. But incase it doesn't, and since you can't think for yourselves👇 BIP110 is a *soft fork*. It is not an altcoin launch. We’ll give it enough time for the PoW, economics, and game theory to play out. If it gains steam, it will succeed. If it becomes clearly hopeless, BIP110 supporters will accept defeat, abandon the clearly stranded chain, and go back to the drawing board on how to protect Bitcoin from centralization. We are not gonna turn around and become shitcoiners by building “110 Coin” adding another dead Bitcoin fork to the dozens that already exist. Some rogue actor might try to revive a failed BIP110 branch, but that would be his altcoin and have nothing to do with our current effort. Bitcoin coldstorage hodlers have NOTHING to worry about with respect to a chain-split. If BIP110 succeeds, everything happens under the hood with nodes reorging naturally to Bitcoin's single blockchain. If BIP110 fails we won't get two competing coins; we'll simply have lost the first battle in a war against centralization that never ends, that's all.

@coinjoined @vazertuche Yeah, Peter Thiel's personal investments advisor, the "pleb". It's the rich socialist playbook.

@vazertuche Famous multi millionaire pleb matthew kratter 😂

Just in case you were wondering if they were gonna suddenly be quiet next month or admit defeat or go away, here’s the truth of the matter…said straight from the horses mouth.

@FieldNas Unless shitcoiners run the show after your opening act and make it a shitcoin.

@bitdov Of course the tip can split, but it won't persist and becom an altcoin. Read better sir.

@PeetXBT @matteopelleg Retard plebs and elites want BIP110 to succeed All the rest of the plebs and elites don't give a shit about BIP110 In one month retard plebs and their elites gonna find out they cannot control Bitcoin

@matteopelleg I am a pleb, I run a node, I hate the suits. And bip110 is beyond stupid. Stop this American bs behavior to split everything into red or blue. The world is full of nuance

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

@vfelipesantana Se quiser brincar de fork, a única forma é tendo posse da chave. Sem chave, sem controle. Por outro lado, tem que pesquisar bem o que for fazer se for fazer

@bitdov E pra quem tem dinheiro em Exchanges e corretoras o que fazer?

@beeforbacon1 @adam3us Some of them, for sure. Most are just sybil, and shitcoiners that love to stir up the pot. "Divide and Conquer" mentality so their shitcoin gets elevated

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.

@MrHodl These are not archived in some internet archive already?

Luke is now deleting all his pedo posts.

@LucasQSats @N30tUx Sim, um mandaria pro espaço, mas o outro seria uma maneira de lucrar BTC real fazendo a pessoa achar que está enviando moeda de fork. Ela estaria mandando pra um endereço que a pessoa não controla a chave no fork, mas sim controla no BTC real. Em ambos os casos quem enviar perde

@bitdov @N30tUx Boa, agora entendi! O primeiro exemplo que você deu, aliás, nem precisa de ator mau intencionado, afinal, o próprio comportamento da rede é que mandaria os satoshinhos para o espaço.