StackItDeep 🪢 BIP-110

I haven't been decorated like this in a long time. 🥂 BIP-110: Making Bitcoin a happy place once again.

Ditch this fuck

Who Hates The BIP-110 Soft Fork?

Part 2: x.com/Loriss65/statu…

One legal opnion on challenges that Bitcoin might face at some point: x.com/Loriss65/statu…

Following up on yesterday: How did Satoshi Dice get shut down? Bitcoin clearly survived. And are there any other instances of particular transaction types that have been completely disallowed? The word on the street is that Bitcoin is so well-designed that it is impossible to make changes that are critical. Yet I know that was one change made in the past where ?184 million BTC? or something like that was erroneously issued and that was fixed. If people are terrified to be ostracized from the Bitcoin community because something is enabled in different than the standard way, exactly what do they plan to do if a court issues an injunction covering the United States barring anyone from mining Blocks because a flow of illegal materials has started accumulating on the Blockcahin, enabled by creative new technologies like Op_Net - what are miners going to do? Ignore the injunction and go to prison for years, while the govt. shuts down the mining facility? I can easily see one of the big players from Trad-Fi going into court and asking for a Declaratory ruling on this type of issue before they start adding a new type of transaction to Bitcoin - if I was somebody's lawyer, this is what I would advise them to do in this situation. I wouldn't want to find out after the fact that DOJ is, say, trying to put a RICO action together and tying a lot elements together, now that I see there are large networks of operators working with each other toward various things Bitcoin. If Bitcoin is going to be protected something needs to be changed that almost no one wants to consider. If nothing is changed, it is my opinion that Bitcoin will be taken down legally with accompanying PR strategically placed, now that it has become MSM news. It does not want to be on the front page of the WSJ, Fortune Magazine, The NY Times, etc, and that is where this type of news will go. Social media will not be controlling the rhetoric anymore. @NickSzabo4 @cryptoquick @calibrated_lies @corbius @ericsmith36 @mattkratter @obaidalda @CunyRenaud @MarkPommrehn @giacomozucco @StackItDeep @1GLENCo @getbitcoin108 FYI, for those aware of my personal hell of the past few months, my husband successfully had a very difficult and complicated surgery for pancreatic cancer over the past two days, and is no long intubated and on a ventilator. For 2 months before that he was on aggressive chemo, and there is no macro-indication of cancer anywhere else. I can finally breathe again. This by no means he will get the miracle cure, or ability to be on a maintenance chemo plan for years, but we are in the category where he now has a shot. One day at a time. I have to say at the bottom of this that this post does not constitute legal advice or authority and you should consult always with your own lawyers before making any decisions on any topics mentioned here. The views above are mine and mine alone and do not represent any organization with which I am affiliated with, but are an outcome of individual study of the material mentioned. The material is copyrighted, but feel free to forward as you see fit. Please DM me if you wish to discuss further, and I'll get you my Signal address so we can do that a bit more safely. All conversations will remain completely confidential - I'm a member of the DC and IL Bars, as well as the United States Supreme Court Bar, though inactive in IL at present bc I haven't done my CLE credits in years.

@JoelHodlman Imagine your kid coming home from preschool and telling you about going poopoo in the "wall potty". Yes, it happened. He went to the other toilet to get the paper. Janitor probably walked in and said, "Oh no, not another."

I need help. I’m at my wits end. How do you get a 3.5 yo boy to go poop on the toilet. Thanks in advance sincerely struggling parents

@Bitcoinapolis55 Our team is doing their warmups and is on stand-by to carry OP_NET's body. We don't anticipate having to pay them overtime.

Everything the "Bitcoin is Money" group can't stand 'goes live' tonight. May it die a quick death, look at all the Web3/ETH lingo. 🙄 At least we know who Core has been working for, not Bitcoiners.

@Loriss65 @LukeDashjr @Kurtis_NZ @dathon_ohm Hey @giacomozucco - what do you think about this? We were talking about legal a bit yesterday.

It's the immutability of the Blockchain that is the real problem regarding CSAM - you don't have to shut down the entire internet if you find internet CSAM or sex death videos or the like. The CSAM has to be stopped, as well as other potentially illegal files, before it gets mined in a block. Period. I don't think filters after the fact will ultimately be enough, because the mined block on the chain still holds the illegal asset. I really really really would like to know any legal analyses any of these well funded entities that are even indirectly linked to Bitcoin have done regarding potential illegal files being mined into a block. I expect they figure at worst as a corporate entity they will have to pay a fine, and that is worth any risk. But sometimes a court will regard the corporate entity as a fiction for a real person, and then the real person becomes the party to the suit and exposed to potentially, serious jail time. A serious judge concerned about the content on the Blockchain won't give a fuck about how "no one is in charge", "it is decentralized", "people can run filters" - they will simply want the illegal material shut down, along with punitive measures. If they have to put an injunction on mining and on running nodes in their particular country, they will. They will make using Knots, Core, everything illegal if it allows access to the mined illegal material. Is there any way to filter what is about to be mined before mining it? The woke people will scream this is censoring, but this is a trillion cap market, and all people connected to it in the United States are going to have exposure to the law. Bitcoin is not above criminal law. Whatever the White Paper says, it is not a legal document, even though the "system" relies on a lot of legal conceptual thinking. Courts won't give a shit about the White Paper - they will say, to whomever is being prosecuted, do you have a way to shut down the access of this immutable chain to illegal material. Period. They will not care how it is done, whether it is cypherpunk principle friendly, or not. Honestly, whomever is funding Core Developers may become the targets of a prosecutor, because they are funding the people with the keys to change things about the system, and have allowed a system to roll forward knowing the risk of illegal material to be on there. Someone could creatively style a RICO action and pull in a huge network of people - miners, individual node runners, these OpNet people if the illegal material is encoded in a DeFi application based on their work. I would suspect individual holders of the bitcoin will be fine, and individual assets on the chain will be fine, but I suspect a legal threat is going to be made at structural elements that would enable another illegal use, even if one somehow gets cleaned up. The courts do not want to be pulled into controversies over Bitcoin over and over again on a piecemeal basis. Maybe they will a few times at first. But ultimately, the attack will be at the entire system. Too many parties are involved in Bitcoin now, it is not a small, insular community where X knows Y, and things like this can get policed internally in a community by norms of expected behavior, and ostracism of someone who doesn't behave properly, etc. The Bitcoin environment is no longer anything close to a single community, it is a huge multi-national marketplace that could lose money fast enough to be another "too big to fail" episode, except with no recovery option for anyone who loses money in any way tied to Bitcoin. This can can't be kicked down the road any longer because the insular community no longer exists. At least, I wouldn't kick it down the road. It has to be addressed, as a legal issue that comes from outside the Bitcoin encompassed way of decision-making. @NickSzabo4 @LukeDashjr @Bitcoin_Lawyer @bc1plainview @hodlonaut @AaronRDay @EA_Rice @Excellion @secsovereign @LawrenceLepard I have to say at the bottom of this that this post does not constitute legal advice or authority and you should consult always with your own lawyers before making any decisions on any topics mentioned here. The views above are mine and mine alone and do not represent any organization with which I am affiliated with, but are an outcome of individual study of the material mentioned. The material is copyrighted, but feel free to forward as you see fit.

Updated chain growth vs projected storage improvement chart using more historic input data and better modelling. #bitcoin won't die. Worst that will happen is near term people will have to upgrade their node hardware sooner than they hoped.

@leo_haf I hear that January 1st, 1970 is an extremely common birthday.

I'm ready to manually assemble debian to revert this. github.com/systemd/system…

@boomer_btc Jon has some kick ass power tech installed at his residence!

I had a bad link to the show posted earlier. Here is the correct one: youtu.be/4FYdfUTFitc

"The Mempool" Is Collectivist Propaganda

That is exactly where public opinion comes in handy. It will be used to support and build upon existing case law. This is how the legal system is commonly abused in the U.S. If not in court, then in legislative circles. I've seen it done to promote anti-gun laws. Anti-Bitcoin laws would be no different. But, Bitcoin crosses borders, so problems in the U.S. don't necessary cause problems elsewhere. As for my node, it will be doing what I think is best to not give the enemies of Bitcoin any new weapons. They can fight it with what they've already got. And I say, "Fuck You" to them with my BIP-110.

There's no precedent where contiguity within the tx serialization makes any difference. It's a made-up theory born within the Core V30 drama, built ad-hoc to target Op_return as some bigger deal than it was. It doesn't make any sense. Entire txs can encode contiguous images without even using op_return. There's a SEPARATE claim about "sanctioned" encoding, which is different and slightly more nuanced. But the "contiguity" one is beyond absurd.

BIS#194 out now, with @giacomozucco!

I can imagine an authoritarian state persecuting the operation of a node for any reason, yes. In places that haven't reached that level of tyranny, however, public opinion plays a role, and the enemies of Bitcoin can and will muster public opinion for their war. In the U.S., an objectionable image, copyrighted, or classified material posted contiguously would give the Elizabeth Warren crowd the next weapon for their crusade. It is easy to dismiss this, but there is prior precedent in law for it in the U.S. Remember Napster? @NickSzabo4 has brought this up in posts when this topic comes up. I share the same concerns as he does when it comes to this subject. I know what our system in the U.S. is capable of, and I don't want to see it tested. The state wins more than 90% of the time.

So, that's fear, as I claimed. And in irrational fear, with irrational solutions. Don't get me wrong: it's not irrational to think that the State will persecute you legally for running a node. It's irrational to think that they will need or consider something absurd like contiguity of encoding within tx serialization to do it. And it's irrational to think a lawyer could use the lack of such contiguity to protect you anyhow. This is very similar to covid: it was not completely irrational to be afraid to die for a cold: it has a relevant mortality rate, especially on vulnerable people. It was irrational to think that the probability was significantly increased by sarscov19 being all over the news, and significantly decreased by wearing a mask while driving alone in your car.

@alphafox Ventel 1200 baud

How fast was your first modem? Mine was a 2400 baud Hayes:

Giacomo, my key driver for supporting BIP-110 is something that I think you said wasn't a big deal. I don't want to put words into your mouth though. I do see the Core v30 "open door" default policy for contiguous data (enough for bad stuff in one unobfuscated blob) to be my primary motivator. The fact that you could send it before via Libre Relay or Slipstream is not the same, and neither is having to chunk it up. The attack vector opened byv30 creates a perception of Bitcoin "welcoming" 100K of contiguous arbitrary data storage for a fee. This is something that can and will be used against Bitcoin when the enemies of Bitcoin are desperate. It's our job as node runners to make sure that we do what we can to not give weapons to our enemies. Sure, they'll find their own, but we don't need to be their dealers. That is the position that Core v30 put us in. I am fully aware that spammers will always find a way. They can chunk up their shit and send it to the network, and my node will grimace and store it anyway. Might even stink up my house, but I'll still be able to run my node and not worry about some lawyer having to defend me for simply running a node. Why should we have to even worry about this? Even if the risk is 0.01% of this ever happening, that's a 1 in 10,000 chance. Every solo block ever mined by a Bitaxe beat those odds. I'd rather, like you, say "Fuck You", but direct those two words at the enemies of Bitcoin. That is what my running of BIP-110 is saying and also to whom I am saying it.

@Cipherhoodlum @stephanlivera @Kurtis_NZ @SpectrGen @BitcoinMotorist @BtcInfinityShow @BitBoxSwiss @BitvaultApp @knutsvanholm True. Irrelevant to the fact. Key driver for covid hysterics was also fear. Still, fuck them.

@bitcoinwell There are quite a few good resources about this. You might check out Melvin's article first, since it talks about the game theory. bip110.org/articles/

So if 55% of blocks signal Bip-110, what is the mechanism for enforcing it if not a hard fork? What happens to the nodes/miners not using BIP-110 in that situation? Wouldn't it by definition create a separate chain if different transactions are now being approved by two different rule sets?

The article needs to be reworked due to a common misunderstanding of how BIP-110 activates. It does so not just by reaching 55% of blocks signalling in a 2016 block window, but also upon reaching block height 965,664 (~Sept 1). This ensures that it will go into the ACTIVE state and enforce its new consensus rules no later than that.

@bitcoinaussie_ @CatoTheElder17 @peruvian_bull Not sure what it being a "LinkedIn article" implies. It was originally posted on our website here, not LinkedIn: bitcoinwell.com/blog/the-great…