Insane that this happened. Are the devs who pushed this fake hit piece going to apologize? Or are they ok with where their credibility now is? View quoted note →

So a couple days ago, there was a fake news story about a hard fork. It was completely debunked by Udi of Taproot Wizards (of all people) and the reporter (the rage/ Lola Leetz) was exposed as grossly incompetent or malicious. But that didn’t stop “anti-knots” devs such as Calle or JB from highlighting and pushing the fake story. Now today we have some attempts to revert the argument back to technicalities. So are we just pretending that hard fork psyop didn’t happen? Will @jb55 @calle apologize for misrepresenting the hard fork story? Were they tricked into believing the story without verifying it- or did they intentionally use it to scare average users?

I give Danny props, he is pretty fair compared to the rest of the Bitcoin-Podcast industrial complex. View quoted note →

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

The final argument has appeared. View quoted note →

Users who are favor of the core v30 change, have you already increased your node’s -datacarriersize config to 100k? Has there been a recommendation to do so, like there was with RBF? Why wait for the update if it’s so helpful to you personally? Every change to network defaults has risks. If -datacarriersize “doesn’t matter” or “isn’t important or consequential” then why is the default change required? 🤔