Darrow O’Lykos

195 posts

Darrow O’Lykos banner
Darrow O’Lykos

Darrow O’Lykos

@darrowlyk

fa998985fe1679857be22658d9bbf6af7093d53a445f317126fc03ecdea78469

Earth Katılım Ocak 2022
385 Takip Edilen152 Takipçiler
Darrow O’Lykos
Darrow O’Lykos@darrowlyk·
@dotkrueger @crypt0e Bigger blocks, then more blocks. They will use quantum fud to insist on freezing patoshi stack. ‘To protect coins from being stolen. Then they will steal the patoshi coins by re-hashing ‘for a security tail emission’
English
1
0
0
24
Darrow O’Lykos
Darrow O’Lykos@darrowlyk·
@Kurtis_NZ @Bryan10309 My assumption is that we both agree that decentralization is key, its makes btc powerful, right? That’s where the no trusted 3rd party is derived. If so, where is the decentralization now? It’s not in mining. It’s in the network, the nodes, or at least it should be. Agree?
English
1
0
0
22
Kurtis Stirling 🇳🇿 ⚡BIP-448
@darrowlyk @Bryan10309 Okay but bip-110 has nothing to do with mining centralisation. And can you demonstrate how the current ~1.6mb average block size will lead to catastrophic centralisation of nodes (by my math, that's a laughable conclusion). 8mb blocks... again, isn't bip-110
English
1
0
0
29
Bryan
Bryan@Bryan10309·
Luke will end up being right about bitcoin again…. BIP110 will activate…or bitcoin, at least as we know it, will die.
English
41
10
110
3.8K
Darrow O’Lykos
Darrow O’Lykos@darrowlyk·
@Kurtis_NZ @Bryan10309 Network, mining, and supply controlled by blackrock, mstr, mega corps. Sure it will still be around. It’s the decentralization and independence that dies. Would you like to see that happen? How would you prevent that?
English
4
0
0
49
Texas Twins Dad | 둥이데디
Some say I can wait til 10k miles for tire rotation on my original Cybertruck tires Some say I should get it done at 6k miles I don’t know what to do Also, some say tire rotation of my CT at Discount Tires may not be safe I am not sure for what reason But it makes me hesitant
English
20
1
6
1.7K
Darrow O’Lykos
Darrow O’Lykos@darrowlyk·
@thebillyboone @AdamSimecka the point was also for it to be an electronic cash system. core decided it needed to change. it needed data storage and they needed to make it better. saylor agrees. who are we to not trust saylor and core?
English
0
0
0
15
Adam Simecka
Adam Simecka@AdamSimecka·
Strategy is only really screwed if they don't actually have 800,000 bitcoin. But they said they have it. So, they must. Right? Only Coinbase knows.
English
77
6
233
18K
Darrow O’Lykos
Darrow O’Lykos@darrowlyk·
@JA_Maartun @cryptoquant_com There’s countless other places on the internet to store whatever data you want. How does it make sense to hash for data storage space? What does Maartuun think??
English
1
0
2
66
Maartunn
Maartunn@JA_Maartun·
📈 OP_RETURN is back in the spotlight. After Bitcoin Core v30 removed the default 80-byte OP_RETURN relay limit, OP_RETURN usage has been climbing again. Are you in favor of more on-chain data, or do you think Bitcoin should stay focused on payments? 👇
Maartunn tweet media
English
3
1
22
4.2K
LikeABoss
LikeABoss@thebossofyoufoo·
@mattlindner LMAO There is nothing probable about the Cubs winning the division do you follow baseball?
English
3
0
2
335
Matt Lindner
Matt Lindner@mattlindner·
The Cubs head into the All Star Break with the top Wild Card spot and a realistic if not probable shot at winning the Central despite having had almost every pitcher of note spend time on the injured list and having a relief corps consisting of bubble gum and duct tape.
English
11
9
271
10.4K
Darrow O’Lykos
Darrow O’Lykos@darrowlyk·
@Snz_BTC Disagree. Clearly a running joke. The issue here is both sides are demonizing the other. One side calls the other evil. The other calls them dog eaters. Is core evil? Probably not evil. Are they trying to change btc so they can capitalize off it? Probably so. Reality is greed
English
1
0
0
61
Darrow O’Lykos
Darrow O’Lykos@darrowlyk·
@hir00717 @kenny_alves @saylor @IIICapital I believe the answer to that argument is bip110 is a response to core30. It was the release of core30 and the way it was implemented without listening that precipitated/forced the release of bip110. Thoughts?
English
0
0
0
23
hiroo717
hiroo717@hir00717·
@kenny_alves @saylor @IIICapital You seem knowledgeable and level-headed: what about the argument that the 'way' the change is being implemented is wrong and sets a bad precedent?
English
2
0
0
118
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
842
6.3K
1.1M
skot
skot@skot9000·
If Saylor really wants Bitcoin to ossify, the most effective thing to do would be to fund developers working on alternative node implementations. Cringe AI slop ain't going to do it.
English
1
1
18
1.3K