digispud 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 🐢

@bramk I mostly just lurk and like things. Recently I've been getting involved (in a small way) in the BIP-110 debate. But I learned, a long time ago, that you can never, ever, change anyone's mind by posting on the Internet. Just doesn't work.

It’s funny that “Bitcoin Twitter” with like 25-100k people that continuously bicker, is maybe like 0.002% of all people that own Bitcoin. A niche of a niche. There are people here that never post, but get all the info they need to just make a decision and go on with their lives.

@bramk What's the motivation behind all this bip-110 stuff anyway? Yes, they're a tiny minority of bitcoiners. But there's clearly an organized push behind all this, somewhere. The vibes with BSV were almost identical, and it was Calvin Ayre funding it all.

There are 58 companies in this BIP110 support directory. What's the combined hash rate? 58 supporters? This is the internet guys. I am just thinking out loud guys.

@bramk So it doesn't require an emergency. It requires "emergency framing". What is this, covid-19? Also not a big fan of the "we are sending a message" idea. A message from whom? To whom? BIP-110 is a terrible idea. And a cursory glance at the rants of those who support it confirm.

Also read this:

Pro BIP110 argument that I like

@hodlonaut It's been wild seeing people back bip-110 that I never expected to. Arthur van Pelt also seems to have gone that way. And many more. I'm not going to start a debate in your thread, but I think bip-110 is a really bad idea. Not the intention, just the implementation.

The people frantically trying to smear and discredit BIP-110 tells its own and very clear story.... David Seroy's employer is Alpen Labs. Read more about how the OP_RETURN uncap facilitated Alpen Labs's business model in the CAPTURE series: citadel21.com/the-merge

Imagine a group of white people saying that they know what it’s like to “feel black,” and that because of this feeling, and their enjoyment of stereotypically “black behavior,” they are now not just black themselves, but the most marginalized and vulnerable type of black person. Imagine them insisting that they should be the main focus of all activism meant to help black people. Imagine them having taxpayer-funded operations to darken their skin and mimic stereotypically black features. Imagine them walking around in blackface, and saying it’s better than being born black. Imagine them being referred to as black in the press and supported by celebrities, with laws passed to make white people who identify as black a protected class. Imagine these people demanding membership in black organizations, and demanding they be given awards created specifically to honor black achievement. Then imagine them getting their way. Now imagine mobs of them showing up to black events that don’t include them to drown out any speakers with noise, and coming up with slurs for any black person who doesn’t accept that white people are black if they say they are. Imagine them calling for the rape, torture, and mass murder of any black person who disagrees with them. Imagine them getting black people doxxed, harassed, assaulted, fired from their jobs, and investigated by the police for saying that you have to be born black to be black. Now imagine the government supporting their demands. That’s exactly the position that women are in right now, with a few extras, like being locked in cells with dangerous men, the sexual predation of lesbians via coercion, and the increased risk of sexual assault in formerly female-only spaces. Our greatest oppressors are now claiming not only the right to oppress us in whole new ways, but the right to erase our identities as women and rewrite the meaning of womanhood in ways that not just include, but prioritize them. If you wouldn’t support this kind of behavior towards black people, you have no business supporting this kind of behavior towards women.

$50 in Bitcoin to someone who replies this this post. Winner will be announced in the morning.

@palmbtcX I can see, on that graph, the point in time where I bought most of my bitcoin. I vividly remember the price action right afterwards. It won't be too long until that point is just part of the (seemingly) "flat" section at the far left. We're very early. And NGU.

Every time I realize how many Bitcoin you can get with a million dollars it reminds me how early we are. Right now it is about 16 bitcoin:native Eventually this number will be 1. Then under 1 and decreasing FOREVER...

@CarlosJackkal @AAStack If you are referring to the change made in Core v30 to the OP_RETURN limit... The change in Core v30 was a change to the default relay policy, i.e. what transactions a node would forward. It can be changed in a config file, and does not affect what is allowed in a block.

@AAStack On the last point - most people in BIP-110 view themselves as a large coaltion reverting the changes of a "small group" (Bitcoin Core) which was just a handful of developers pushing their view on the whole network.

What is Bitcoin BIP-110? (explained simply) Think of every Bitcoin transaction as an envelope. Normally you write “I paid Bob 5 coins.” But people started stuffing pictures & data inside instead. BIP-110 is a proposed rule change to shrink the envelope so less non-money “junk” fits. It’s a temporary soft fork (~1 year, then expires automatically). 👤 Who’s behind it: Authored by Dathon Ohm (evolved from an earlier draft, BIP-444). Its main champion in practice is Luke Dashjr via Bitcoin Knots, with the Ocean pool mining the first supporting block. Notably, it’s driven by a very small group and that’s part of the concern: a contentious rule change pushed by few, with little broad support, is exactly the kind of thing Bitcoin’s slow, high-consensus process is meant to guard against. ✅ Supporters say: reduces blockchain bloat, lowers node costs, keeps Bitcoin focused on being money. ⚠️ Critics say: • Risk of a chain split (only needs 55% miner vote vs the usual ~95%) THIS IS MY MAIN CONCERN PERSONALLY • Could freeze some existing coins (UTXOs) • May block future upgrades like BitVM / Layer 2 • Doesn’t fully work data can still get in other ways 📊 Where it stands: miner support is near 0%, far below the 55% needed. 🗓️ Deadline: ~August 2026. It either triggers a chain split or quietly fails to activate. The bigger point: whatever side you’re on, Bitcoin’s whole purpose is to stay open-source and permissionless exactly as designed. No small group should be able to force changes the wider network doesn’t agree to. That’s a feature, not a bug. Decide for yourself. 🟠

@JM_speakss I don't think it is too risky - I've done the same myself. On the odd occasion I've needed cash quickly, I've sold a little bit. Then bought it back again as soon as I could. Most liquid asset on earth, you can sell it 24/365 whenever you need to.

A few years ago, I built an emergency fund the “responsible” way. Six months of expenses. Sitting safely in cash. I checked the account one day and realized something: The number hadn’t gone down… But everything that number could buy had. Mortgage was higher. Groceries were higher. Insurance was higher. My addictions were higher. Life was more fckin expensive. My emergency fund was “safe” in nominal terms while quietly losing 10% in purchasing power every year. So I made a decision most financial advisors would call reckless: I moved my entire emergency fund into Bitcoin. Yes, the price moves. Yes, it can drop hard. But I’d rather accept visible volatility in an asset with a fixed supply than guarantee the slow erosion of my savings in cash. People say Bitcoin is too risky for an emergency fund. I think holding 100% of your safety net in a currency designed to lose purchasing power is risky too. Maybe I’m insane. Maybe I’m early. But my safety net is now measured in sats. Be honest: Would you ever hold your emergency fund in Bitcoin? Or is that one line you’d never cross?

@TeddyBitcoins He's sounding more and more like Craig Wright these days.

😂

@LoveIsBitcoin21 Adam Back is (unsurprisingly) correct. Trying to police consensus-valid data on the blockchain because you don't like certain types of transaction is dangerous. It's like saying you support free speech, except for .... "something". Who chooses, and when do they stop?

Adam Back just told BIP 110 supporters they don't understand Bitcoin. "What BIP 110 wants, at its most basic, is a quest to police other people." "If you won't listen to reason, your recourse is to fork. But Bitcoin won't be joining it." The cypherpunk who invented Hashcash just schooled an entire movement.

@LoveIsBitcoin21 It's interesting in a way to watch crap like this play out. Only the lawyers (on both sides) win. Bitcoin isn't just immune to nonsense like this, it's the exact abuse that bitcoin is designed to resist. This is why bitcoin was invented. To prevent this. And it will.

You hold your Bitcoin for a decade without touching it — the way every Bitcoiner is taught. A New York court says that means you've "abandoned" your property. The Noah Doe lawsuit wants to seize 3.7M dormant BTC. The legal theory could apply to anyone who self-custodies. The hearing is Monday. Pay attention.

@JM_speakss Same here - and I'm over 50, so don't want to wait 20 years. If it doesn't work out, I'll be alright. I have a decent sized (non-bictoin-adjacent) pension. But I'd rather have a glorious retirement than a mediocre one.

I’m depending on Bitcoin to help me retire in the next 10 to 20 years. I don’t trust my salary, pension, the dollar, or traditional markets alone to preserve my purchasing power for the next two decades. So every month, I keep stacking. Maybe that conviction changes my life. Maybe I’m wrong. But I’d rather take the bet on Bitcoin becoming what I believe it was built to become than spend the next 20 years hoping the same financial system that keeps making life more expensive somehow saves me. Be honest: Are you depending on Bitcoin to retire too? And if not, what are you depending on?

@AAStack Lopp made an entire catalogue of LukeJr's behaviour. (long read) blog.lopp.net/knot-a-serious… Normally I'd prefer to separate people's work from their life, but sometimes it's better to know who you are dealing with it. Biggest red flag for me: Luke conflates law and morality.

The Benevolent King is a Pedo 👀

@AsyncN8 Or read this, if you really want to understand the problem that BIP-110 tries (and fails) to solve. stephanlivera.github.io/Bitcoin-Spam/

ALL BITCOINERS! THIS is your chance to tell government bootlickers & scammers they’ll never control Bitcoin. Tell Saylor to keep his Stonks. Tell Back to keep his ponzy & Epstein Buddies. Tell Bailey to fk off with his scams. JOIN US & KEEP FINANCIAL FREEDOM. We welcome U #BIP110

@AAStack @AsyncN8

@AAStack @AsyncN8 BIP-110 changes the consensus rules, which is why it must be strongly resisted. The (allegedly bad) OP_RETURN change that Core made in v30 was just a change to the default relay policy, and can be changed in a config file.

@AAStack BIP-110 does change the consensus rules. This is why it is dangerous. The OP_RETURN change that Core v30 made (that seems to anger some people) does not change the consensus rules, just the default relay policy. Which any node can change easily in a config file.

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.

@LundukeJournal I find the "Rust-everything" movement to be a bit creepy. I don't recall any other language getting pushed so hard into every project to replace perfectly good C code. Maybe I'm just old, cynical, and set in my ways. But it feels a bit like an attack, somehow.

One of the key goals of “Lunduke Computer Operating System” (LCOS) is to avoid the onslaught of needless, forced Rust clones. The approach I’m taking, to accomplish that, is as simple as humanly possible: If any core components decide to force Rust adoption (Git, apt, clones of Coreutils, etc.), we have a separate package repository where we can provide Non-Rusted(tm) versions or originals. Then we make those packages the default. Nice and simple.

@IIICapital Stephan's explainer really cleared this all up for me. Before reading that I was pretty confused. It's a great resource (and a very pretty website). BIP-110 is pointless, probably dangerous, and deserves to fizzle out, as it almost certainly will.

One unintended consequence of BIP-110 is that, if demand for arbitrary data storage remains unchanged, the same amount of spam would consume more block space.