Interesting. Still not updating my node 😤

you do you MAHDOOD

Appreciate the research though in case it wasn’t obvious 🫡

@Matthew Kratter what say you?

It’s not about that. It’s that little greedy weaklings are unilaterally messing with the code for personal gain. That takes away #bitcoin s panacea status as being incorruptible and immutable. That makes Bitcoin useless as money.

Consistency would be an attribute to topple central banking. Consistency in aim Consistency in code Every time a change like this is made, (what problem did the original increase solve for?) a little faith is lost. Oh that's right, if we don't support it, we don't have to run that node version. But of course we get told nodes do not matter. Bitcoin is the best shot to end central banking, changes like this make it more difficult to achieve that.

I think this is missing the point. At least in my view the issue is not just about what is happening today, but what can happen in the future. We should not let a single team control the destiny of Bitcoin. It is healthy to see people stepping up to provide an alternative.

so there was no reason at all for v30 to force the removal of the default OP_RETURN limit and enrage the community 🤷‍♂️ v30 has stirred up a hornet's nest triggering a natural reaction to protect the queen chain 🐝

Instead of questioning why there are "non-standard" op_returns, you still send money to stupid shit like this. @ODELL you are the biggest cuck fr.

just becuz the mempool hasnt gone to 2019 levels does not mean that it wont it very likely will again and those who run v30 will be the reason why it can continue . its really not that hard to run knots+bip110 and signal for a clearer mempool . I really hope more node runners take the leap to securing the mission of bitcoin which is to be for monetary data not jpegs inscriptions and tokens

Great charts, thanks for sharing.

Doesn’t this also suggest that the #1 touted reason for removing the relay limit - to get people to use the trash can instead of bloat the UTXO set - has been proven to be a useless and inconsequential argument though? I appreciate the data collection regardless, but this doesn’t seem to a win on either side of the debate. Actually sort of a lose lose imo. The singular touted “benefit” is proving to be nonsense. View quoted note →

i hate everything about all of this. fuck the fuckers. core and knots. they seem to have sold or lost all their coins anyway, do they even care about bitcoin or are they just a bunch of butthurt c++ nocoiners.

Looks like Core got fooled by fake market demand.

"I'm cool with modifications to bitcoin that allows easy storage of non moneyetary data on the blockchain, I did the numbers".

All it takes is one controversial image.

I’ve been in bitcoin for like a decade and idk what op-return even is. “Nobody understands the fiancial system” -J Epstein, “the money guy”

Very interesting to have data on this. Is that omni USDT related? Bitcoin coloured coins are imho underused. View quoted note →

Runes are not being addressed by BIP110 is a good point. People need drama; the data talk is too dry for them.

Those transactions side stepped the mempool and entered the blockchain by being submitted directly to miners via API. If Slipstream isn't a centralizing attack on bitcoin I don't know what is. Luckily wallets hadn't been built for it, and V30 removes the incentive to do it.

You can't leave those out without a hard fork. Even then, other ways will be found, and then what, fork again? The (non)solution sounds worse than the symptom

Which transactions?

Which transactions?

Err, so why the desperate push to remove the OP_RETURN limit in the face of significant opposition then?

compact blocks makes your node use less bandwidth. it doesn't work properly when you ignore a lot of valid transactions in the mempool that are just going to be confirmed soon anyway. it works properly when your node's mempool policy mirrors the actual consensus rules. you are not protecting yourself from eventually storing and relaying the data, you are just damaging the compact blocks functionality to your own detriment.

From the outside it just doesnt make a lot of sense to wanting to be able to store lots of non-monetary data on the hardest money blockchain. If your data shows that it doesnt happen a lot, lets just shut it off before it becomes an attack vector to the network. I also can understand how it comes in waves, as it is more like a meme/altcoin type of activity where people pump and dump their jpeg projects for a few months and move on. Not sure if we want to bring ETH-shenanigans to BTC.

They were NOT submitted to miners.

@knutsvanholm Would love to know your take on this! Ideologically fully with you, seeing these data points, perhaps it's not as big of a deal? What am I missing?

We are looking for someone who can lend our holding company 300,000 US dollars. We are looking for an investor who can lend our holding company 300,000 US dollars. We are looking for an investor who can invest 300,000 US dollars in our holding company. With the 300,000 US dollars you will lend to our holding company, we will develop a multi-functional device that can both heat and cool, also has a cooking function, and provides more efficient cooling and heating than an air conditioner. With your investment of 300,000 US dollars in our holding company, we will produce a multi-functional device that will attract a great deal of interest from people. With the device we're developing, people will be able to heat or cool their rooms more effectively, and thanks to its built-in stove feature, they'll be able to cook whatever they want right where they're sitting. People generally prefer multi-functional devices. The device we will produce will have 3 functions, which will encourage people to buy even more. The device we will produce will be able to easily heat and cool an area of ​​45 square meters, and its hob will be able to cook at temperatures up to 900 degrees Celsius. If you invest in this project, you will also greatly profit. Additionally, the device we will be making will also have a remote control feature. Thanks to remote control, customers who purchase the device will be able to turn it on and off remotely via the mobile application. Thanks to the wireless feature of our device, people can turn it on and heat or cool their rooms whenever they want, even when they are not at home. How will we manufacture the device? We will have the device manufactured by electronics companies in India, thus reducing labor costs to zero and producing the device more cheaply. Today, India is a technologically advanced country, and since they produce both inexpensive and robust technological products, we will manufacture in India. So how will we market our product? We will produce 2000 units of our product. The production cost, warehousing costs, and taxes for 2000 units will amount to 240,000 US dollars. We will use the remaining 60,000 US dollars for marketing. By marketing, we will reach a larger audience, which means more sales. We will sell each of the devices we produce for 3100 US dollars. Because our product is long-lasting and more multifunctional than an air conditioner, people will easily buy it. Since 2000 units is a small initial quantity, they will all be sold easily. From these 2000 units, we will have earned a total of 6,200,000 US dollars. By selling our product to electronics retailers and advertising on social media platforms in many countries such as Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube, we will increase our audience. An increased audience means more sales. Our device will take 2 months to produce, and in those 2 months we will have sold 2000 units. On average, we will have earned 6,200,000 US dollars within 5 months. So what will your earnings be? You will lend our holding company 300,000 US dollars and you will receive your money back as 950,000 US dollars on November 27, 2026. You will invest 300,000 US dollars in our holding company, and on November 27, 2026, I will return your money to you as 950,000 US dollars. You will receive your money back as 950,000 US dollars on November 27, 2026. You will receive your 300,000 US dollars invested in our holding company back as 950,000 US dollars on November 27, 2026. We will refund your money on 27/11/2026. To learn how you can lend USD 300,000 to our holding company and to receive detailed information, please contact me by sending a message to my Telegram username or Signal contact number listed below. I will be happy to provide you with full details. To learn how you can invest 300,000 US dollars in our holding, and to get detailed information, please send a message to my Telegram username or Signal contact number below. I will provide you with detailed information. To get detailed information, please send a message to my Telegram username or Signal username below. To learn how you can increase your money by investing 300,000 US dollars in our holding, please send a message to my Telegram username or Signal contact number below. Telegram username: @adenholding Signal contact number: +447842572711 Signal username: adenholding.88

That's nonsense. I can confirm as someone that actually runs a node that bandwidth and CPU usage are considerably less running a knots node than it was with core. What you are arguing is nodes should just follow miners. That's the wrong way around, miners work for the network, nodes signal what we want to see in the network. I will filter my mempool how I want not how compromised core devs paymasters want me to.

👀🤔

Core can unilaterally do whatever the fuck they want with Core. You on the other hand can choose to run whatever the fuck you want. Same as it ever was.

Response of a 13 year old…

This is a disingenuous argument, BIP110 does more than restore the op_return filter, it also fixes the taproot inscriptions fiasco and several other things. I did an analysis of my own, and found that BIP110 would have saved the blockchain from 650mb of garbage in January.

Slipstream absolutely was an attack on the network, but it was only possible because the filler was only applied in policy, not in consensus. Bip110 would reject blocks containing transactions from slipstream. Core v30 didn't fix anything, it just opened the door for abuse wider.

How else did they get into a block then?