Moera ₿ ❤️🏛2.0 - 🙅‍♂️💉

The only way to attack Bitcoin is to slowly degrade the network by using it to store arbitrary data on the people’s nodes. Forcing the nodes to store CSAM will be a definite blow to decentralization and to Bitcoin. BIP110 is about stopping this degradation process.

✅ 2025: doing this at the consensus layer is the only path forward ❗️2026: doing this at the consensus layer is an attack on Bitcoin The moment BIP-110 was released, we set the precedent that we no longer seek nor require consensus with bad actors.

@adam3us @CunyRenaud @LukeDashjr Don't nonsense me on this one Adam. I don't accept it. These points specifically hit the criteria of vulnerabilities worthy of inclusion in the database.

For anyone interested about the truth: Adam Back is absolutely, overtly and veritably lying about me *ever* supporting BIP110, or even being "a fence sitter" about it. I have always strongly, clearly and unequivocally opposed any similar fork proposal since the very earliest suggestions. I have always been, and remain, consistently opposed to: - using consensus rules to tackle specific types of onchain spam, - defensively addressing any kind of "illegal data" moral panic in any possible way (mempool policies included), - enforcing any controversial consensus change (including the ones I agree with, unlike this one) without clear full-ecosystem agreement. It's a bit unfortunate that a very influential voice in the industry is lying about me, since I have a smaller reach to debunk him. Maybe some of you can help me by spreading the correction. Thanks.

@giacomozucco So now he is also against lesbians, but still pro minors 🏝️ ? #complex pfff

@EvanWritesOnX @SimonDixonTwitt

Afaict the basis for the assertion that BIP110 is an attack on Bitcoin is this: "It doesn't have consensus - therefore it's an attack on Bitcoin." When you point out that BIP148 didn't have consensus either you get met with two responses: "Yes it did" (which is an obvious lie - see @ODELLXYZ) or the more nuanced "It's OK because segwit (which it would forcibly activate) had consensus" which is also a lie, but a slightly easier to believe one as there was certainly A LOT of support for segwit. The only real contrast between the two scenarios (fork wars in 2017 and current war) is that Core developers liked Segwit but for whatever reason, began disliking anything that attempts to reduce arbitrary data in Bitcoin since ~2023, prior to which it was the norm. So it just appears to me to be nothing more than an appeal to authority dressed up to look like adherence to deep network principles that simply don't exist, or have been happily violated in the past. Minority soft forks are a thing.

@Krispijnpunt @BartMaes16 @rinusredpill @EvaVlaar Jip in de praktijk wel, al lijkt me Bart authentieker.

@BartMaes16 @rinusredpill @EvaVlaar Bro, je bent net zo een shill voor Israel als zij.

Die vrouw is zo perfect gecast dat het gewoon eng wordt. Te mooi, te welbespraakt, te netjes. Dit is geen organische opkomst, dit is controlled opposition in z’n puurste vorm. Netjes genoeg voor de elite, maar net niet gevaarlijk genoeg voor het systeem. Klassiek gevalletje.

The first 40 minutes of this podcast lays out my entire Prague talk concerning the Landauer attack. If you like it, share it with Node runners. Nodes, not code, are the law of the land in Bitcoin. youtube.com/watch?v=mx7ZyE…

People do not hate Peter Todd enough.

Andy is a liar. He's had me blocked for months, while I have not had him blocked. Andy, please comment on the cloud mining ponzi allegations. These should be easy to rebut-- unless of course they're all true. Are you going to do the Do Kwon private jet thing soon?

@ScottAWolfe So which pleb node?

To all #BIP110 supporters, I’ve listened to a lot of your diverse concerns and I want you to know that I empathize. I disagree with the proposed “solution” (this BIP, at this point in time) but I want you to know that I hear you and I believe that the majority of you are just trying to do what you believe is best for the long term evolution and growth of Bitcoin and $BTC as the world’s best money; the people’s money. Even if we disagree on the BIP, we have far more in common than that which separates us. Let’s keep the lion’s share of our time, energy and righteous rage for the perverse, broken systems and institutions that we are trying to disrupt and dismantle. One love (Bitcoiners)!

"OK insults aren't working - we can't shame them into submission. Let's try something else."

Hi, So BIP110 isn't anti-spam. It identifies >83 byte OP_RETURNs and the usage of OP_IF in taproot specifically as threats that go beyond mere spam having become sanctioned as *official methods of file storage in Bitcoin*. This happened as a result of Core 30 removing a filter in the midst of a discussion that was centered around the less consequential defaults for relay policy, which remains where conversations about spam actually belong. Bitcoin is *not* a file storage platform, and if it is allowed to become one it seems inevitable to most that it will eventually be used for the worst kind of media given its unique ability to "force" everyone to store the media in perpetuity whilst having the option to do so anonymously. Those who do not understand this scream "fear mongering" or simply do not understand that Bitcoin only works if it is decentralized and that deviating from a monetary mandate to arbitrary data storage means the death of decentralization. This has all been carefully delineated amidst an incredibly noisy, emotionally charged conversation which is all the result of Bitcoin not having a corporate governance structure which is a feature, not a bug. You can participate in the discussion in an informed way, and if you were to do so, it would be greatly appreciated given your overwhelming influence. But it appears that so far, you have yet to even understand the motivation for the BIP. The spam filter/default relay policy conversation never ended and continues the minute BIP110 activates and the JPG spammers all find some new approach. But Bitcoin will no longer be vulnerable to the specific issue BIP110 targets.

Zojuist heb ik verzocht de Kamer terug te roepen van reces voor een debat over de veiligheidssituatie in Ter Apel. Het Rode Kruis en Vluchtelingenwerk achten de situatie zo ernstig dat ze hun medewerkers terugtrekken uit het asielzoekerscentrum. Ondertussen kunnen asielzoekers nog altijd gewoon Ter Apel in en kan de veiligheid van omwonenden dus op geen enkele wijze worden gegarandeerd. Om over de open grenzen en feit dat het kabinet-Jetten dit probleem aan álle gemeenten in Nederland opdringt nog niet eens te spreken. Dit wanbeleid moet stoppen. @geertwilderspvv @Eerdmans @GidiMarkuszower @henkvermeer @MonaKeijzer @chris_stoffer @rubenbrekelmans @HenriBontenbal @jpaternotte @mirjambikker @jesseklaver @jimmydijk @JanStruijs @Ct_teunissen @StephanvBaarle @DassenLaurens

BIP-110 is everything I love about BITCOIN - @GrassFedBitcoin

BIP-110 has been a hot topic in El Salvador, so I flew to the Florida Everglades to hang out with @EricVStacks and get his perspective for @BuildInES. We shot guns, talked Bitcoin, and ended up having an epic convo. 🔥 Full vid: youtu.be/E_sBOLCt514

✅ One of the most sensible, highest-integrity people in Bitcoin @EricVStacks discusses BIP-110 with @sovmindset 👀 Stop what you’re doing and watch this.

Alex @Gladstein claims to fight for "human rights" but really just funnels millions of dollars through his posh offices in the Empire State Building through @HRF to the global Bitcoin Core industrial complex.