Boosting my Friday productivity… by working with F1 practice sessions on in the background. No soy super fan de colapinto (mis fav siguen siendo Verstappen y Piastri) pero admito que si quiero que le vaya muy bien

Que buena serie the office, no se cómo no la había visto antes

Quienes son de Venezuela aquí? Hacemos hacemos follow pack en following.space? Comenten aquí #grownostr #asknostr #venezuela

I'm trying to spend more time reading. This was the last book I read—it made me reflect on many things, from how I relate to others to how I choose to act in certain situations. Highly recommended #book #readstr #bookstr

"Don't cry when we don't use Bitcoin Core shitcoiners" Dude, nobody's forcing you to use Bitcoin Core — if you want to try something else, go for it, it's all good haha.

Let’s talk a bit about OP_RETURN. First: what is it? It’s an opcode that allows arbitrary data to be stored in a transaction in a way that makes it unspendable. Simply put: you can use it to embed things like a message, a hash, or even an image in #Bitcoin. In Bitcoin, by consensus, there are no restrictions on OP_RETURN. These are fully valid transactions under the protocol. What blocks them today is a local policy in Bitcoin Core, not the protocol itself. So this proposal isn’t a philosophical shift — it’s an alignment between Core's standardness rules and the consensus rules. Calling it a “cultural change” ignores that the protocol already allows it. What exists today is a technical and policy inconsistency. Whether we like “spam” or not (meaning anything not strictly monetary), the reality is that it exists and will continue to exist. This proposal simply provides a cleaner path for it to happen. It doesn’t enable it — it’s already enabled. This isn’t about “welcoming” anyone, nobody needs permission to use Bitcoin, if someone wants to embed data, they will, the only thing we can influence is how they do it and how much collateral damage it causes. The current restrictions haven’t stopped anything, they’ve only pushed abusers to use more harmful methods like Taproot fake scripts, witness stuffing, etc. All of it worse for the system than using OP_RETURN. Let’s be honest: – There is no way to filter “spam” 100%. – Filters can be bypassed. – Miners can include whatever they want. – If someone is willing to pay the fee, they’ll do it — today or tomorrow. So what’s the most pragmatic option? ➡️ Align standardness with consensus. ➡️ Offer the least harmful path. ➡️ Acknowledge technical reality and minimize its impact. It’s not a perfect solution — but it’s the least damaging one. And most importantly, it’s the only one aligned with Bitcoin’s protocol. If you see this as a philosophical shift, it’s because you never truly understood how Bitcoin’s consensus works. We’re not opening a door, the door has always been open.

When people talk about success, they often mention opportunities, background, and skills. But for me, the most important factor is mindset. The number of people I've seen achieve great things from scratch—without being geniuses or having an inheritance—just by having the right mindset and clear goals, is incredible.

Gotta admit, watching #BitcoinCore devs argue with #BitcoinKnots fans on Twitter is making this cold recovery way less boring.

Working

I think none of us in #Bitcoin actually want it to be flooded with spam. This is simply a proposal where certain trade-offs were discussed, but it still lacks consensus. Regarding how comments are being handled in the repository —sorry if this sounds controversial—but I think that if someone doesn’t have the full context and is just looking to stir things up, it’s fair for those comments to be marked as spam.

Just because you mostly see tech stuff on my socials doesn’t mean that’s all I talk about. I’m way more than that — I just use my platforms for work, not really for personal things.

I feel like this week I managed to find a much better balance between my personal life and work.

addicted to these videos

Open source software is freely available for use and open to contributions from anyone—no permission needed. It thrives on community involvement through coding, design, and community support. Is it "free work"? Not really. Contributing is voluntary, something you do because you use a project and want to see it improve—a win-win situation. How do full-time open source contributors make money? Funded projects pay active contributors and offer bounties for specific tasks. Companies and foundations that support open source also provide financing. It's different from traditional employment, but I personally love the open source work style. I advocate for open source because technological advancement depends on it, and contributing to projects you use is incredibly fulfilling. The goal is advancing technology, not just getting paid to code. For beginners seeking experience, contributing to projects you enjoy will impress interviewers far more than practice apps. You'll also gain valuable insight into real development environments. In conclusion, participate in open source projects you care about. Making money takes time and proof of work, but you'll help improve tools you actually use. If you're chasing high salaries, get a job—don't expect payment for voluntary contributions. #OpenSource #SoftwareDevelpment

I've been finishing my tasks like a champion every day this week

My night

It's such a junior thing to say that you shouldn't deploy on Fridays, and I'm not going to argue about it.

Por si alguien quiere probar windsurf, a mi me gusto mas que cursor, es mas barato y tiene GPT-4.1 gratis por tiempo limitado

Referrals | Windsurf

Refer a friend and earn bonus add-on prompt credits.

Bitcoin at the code level is beautiful—you have everything, no magic, just pure core concepts from computer science and cryptography.