Satoshi Bitcoin Cycle, as defined by Crises 🧵🔽 "For society to function properly, all it takes is a small number of intolerant VIRTUOUS people with SKIN in the GAME, in the form of COURAGE." - Minority Rule, Taleb GENESIS (2009) - Creation of Bitcoin Intolerant Monetary Purist Minority rises 1st Satoshi Crisis (2015-17) - Blocksize Wars. Tolerant Majority fought a war for control, disguised as blocksize debate. Intolerant minority (thank the Core) refused to give in. Victory for Bitcoin & society. 2nd Satoshi Crisis - Miner vs Node Power (2017): Tolerant majority (Wuille, Maxwell,Corall,etc) wanted miner fork activation. Intolerant minority (Luke, Shaolinfry) said Node Power (UASF) = key Bitcoin difference. Intolerant minority won - Bitcoin survived. 3rd Satoshi Crisis (2020-21) - Spam Floodgates Intolerant minority (Luke) warned Taproot = spam vector. Tolerant majority (Wuille, Poelstra, Maxwell, Nick, Zhao, Adam) pressed activation (Speedy Trial), then rejected fixes (2 controversial). Inscriptions/bloat surged. 4th Satoshi Crisis (2025) - Core confidence crisis. Tolerant majority (Core) pushes high risk-low return change to align with OOB, PP, trolls, despite controversy. Dissent squashed. Intolerant minority (Knots) fights back. Technical nuance awareness on the rise.

Subtle difference: protocol used as intended-block structure intact vs protocol exploitation-corrupted block structure. Core v30 makes OP_RETURN viable 4 wallets to start accepting & displaying images. It's not black & white, it's probabilities & probability is increased by v30. I keep saying: Core v30 has awful ROR in terms of game theory. Because of prevalence of older Core versions which will not upgrade, OOB & PP remains, no changes to fee estimation, no changes to decentralization, not changes to propagation. We are buying nothing, except larger attack surface. What's in it for vast majority of users? More risk What's in it for the network? More risk What's in it for the world? Weakening of Hard Money Why would Core do such a thing? Sorry to be rude, but the entire Core v28-v30 saga is a massive circle jerk. Plain and simple. This is why people are mad at you. Adam, you are a legend, brother, a well respected Bitcoin OG. You are using your considerable brain power & political capital to muddy water, vaguely trying to salvage the un-salvageable. Core is losing the war by winning the battle. It is the most probable outcome, if you understand game theory. "For society to function properly, all it takes is a small number of intolerant VIRTUOUS people with SKIN in the GAME, in the form of COURAGE." - Minority Rule, Taleb In the long game, intolerant minority wins.

THESIS ====== Bitcoin is STRONGEST when DEFAULTS=TIGHT and CONTROLS=WIDE. Knots is the antifragile client. Core trends toward cartelware. AXIOMS ======= A1. Security outranks convenience. Fee estimation and propagation tweaks are noise compared to keeping consensus sacred. A2. Policy variety = resilience. A mixed mempool makes censorship costly & faults survivable. Policy must never ossify into consensus defaults. A3. OOB/PP are ineradicable through policy. They’re latency hacks. You contain them, not abolish them. A4. Non-mining nodes incentives = tight policy. Sovereign nodes protect themselves from DDOS by filtering junk. A5. Miner incentives = loose policy. Templates broaden to maximize fees, but edges stay controlled. A6. Max resiliency = max distance between tight nodes & loose miners, plus max variety across the spectrum. A6 is a function of A2, A4, and A5. COROLLARIES =========== C1. All nodes matter. Even “quiet” nodes that neither mine nor spend enforce consensus. They: 1) quarantine invalid forks (2013) => they don’t just reject, they prevent further relay. 2) throttle spam floods (2015), 3) protect supply cap (2018 inflation bug). Without them, miners are just hashing an altcoin fork. With them, Bitcoin stays Bitcoin. C2. Healthiest client traits: 1) Ships tightest defaults to keep the baseline lean. 2) Exposes all policy knobs so power users can widen deliberately. 3) Hides nothing, welds nothing. Defaults aren’t destiny. Objections & Counters ================= 1. “Loose helps fee estimation.” Wrong. Block inclusion, not mempool relay, sets the price. Extra junk adds variance, not clarity. 2. “Loose aids propagation.” No. Compact blocks + low bandwidth costs matter. Loose-everywhere just bloats relay and kills home nodes. 3. “Diversity fragments mempools.” That’s the point. Fragmentation stops defaults from ossifying into law. 4. “OOB makes policy moot.” OOB masks insider costs, doesn’t erase them. Tight defaults quarantine the blast radius. Fees change the game ================== a) Low fees: diversity looks muted, OOB papers over. b) High fees: diversity bites. Weird-but-valid txs = pure revenue. Ignore them and you’re burning sats. Tight defaults guarantee those signals survive. CONCLUSION: Knots vs Core =========== KNOTS: Tight defaults + wide operator knobs. Policy entropy preserved, consensus untouched. CORE Loosening defaults and welding settings to mirror miner behavior. Fewer knobs, higher costs, creeping centralization. RESULT ===== Knots is the healthier client. Core drifts toward cartel-ware.

Path of No Return for Core is Self Evident: malware releases, dissent suppression, sealed echo chamber, censorship of critical voices. Run Knots!

Core dev talks about how Bitcoin Knots resurgence triggers they/them😢

Bitcoin tends toward absolutes & extremes. Bitcoin is the LEAST efficient way to store the monetary ledger but MOST resilient. Therefore, storing anything else but money is overengineering & destined for failure. Bitcoin is an edge case that scoffs at general principles.

ChatGPT: Bitcoin Knots > Core

Merit is winning. Bitcoin's forged in flames of brutal fight w/authority. Come at us, bro, but no whining when you’re thrown out with dishwater. You've seen nothing, yet. Bitcoin will evolve, but never into expression of high-time-preference frivolity, as such things evaporate quickly, & Bitcoin MUST endure for centuries. Any impudent cretin pushing blink-of-an-eye "economic realities," chasing relevance, or seeking control deserves a Sparta-style cliff toss. Todd is headed there. Ask yourself where you stand. You have a brain, not luxury of time. Bitcoin is our bequest to unborn generations. One reckless soft-fork rn carves eternal regret onchain, inviting future bitcoiners to curse your flimsy "ideas." for a very long time. They won't care about your "clever" spin. This is fiduciary duty measured in centuries. Will you build a legacy or chase fleeting BS? Pollute humanity’s best shot at sound money; and profit from it?... Shame, man

High Time Preference = Low IQ Resilient system has to be equipped with efficient adaptable immune system/filter Calling low time preference immune system "sybil attack" = "I don't understand Bitcoin". Permissive policy is high time preference - not built to stand for generations. What are you doing with Bitcoin? It is not for you. Literally any of thousands of alternatives is designed SPECIFICALLY with you in mind. They are all waiting with open arms.

"throwing chess pieces at opponent is more efficient & makes chess more resilient." High Time Preference = LOW IQ System game theory is a technical aspect. 1) Knots adoption is organic and many running miners. 2) Financially motivated long term damage to Bitcoin's core function is high time preference 3) Network with compromised immune system is not resilient.

"I don't like jpegs. But..." Yes, yes... and removing water filter makes water pressure go up. Low time preference. Not filtering non-monetary transactions shifts incentives away from money & guarantees lower nominal value & less monetary related usage for Bitcoin over time.

History doesn't repeat, but it rhymes

Coretards are a special interest group. Change my mind.

Make it make sense, Core!

Not your keys, not your problem (until it is)

Avg Core vs Knots Supporter

Read My Lips! (No New Wars) feat. Bush & Trump

I'm going to choose my words very carefully. This is not flippant. I have given it a lot of thought and research.The bad actors are not the most active devs but they exercise sufficient clout and political machination to keep everyone else focused on their agenda. I'm only going to name names after I am certain beyond any doubt of their complete guilt and circumstance. Peter Todd is one of if not the easiest to finger as a bad actor. His commentary, proposals, analysis and inclinations are increasingly and explicitly more and more detrimental to bitcoin. To me it does not matter whether he is actually compromised, blackmailed, or simply greedy, or just full of hubris. His continuing actions in Bitcoin represent a serious threat to the ecosystem and must be stopped. I will stop here for now. I don't want to name clowns, as they have their own pain and ultimately are dismissed. I also don't want to name past and former leaders that shoulder the burden of keeping the org functional. For them the situation is more nuanced, but shame on them for not having the balls to say the truth, do the right thing. However, I have been in situations where the choice is excessively difficult and may involve personal issues, dangers and pressures. But that is just compassion. And you know what? Bitcoin doesn't give a s***. it destroys egos and the best plans of mortals. Run your own miners, short Mara, support ocean as long as they act in our interest, run knots. Victory is ours.

P. Todd + Core Complicity = Core is Attack on Bitcoin🚨

Bitcoin Knots explained by Buster Keaton A Silent Movie (11s)