Login to reply
Replies (158)
Bitcoin twitter lol
Just reject the Core v30 malware.
But the point is that Core devs are compromised, don't put your head in the sand.
Core devs are compromised.
Core V30 is a malware.
Run Bitcoin Knots, it fixes not only OP_RETURN but also inscriptions spam which Core devs intentionally allowed.
View quoted note →
Keep misguiding your followers coward...!!!
Your reputation damage will be so hard that I doubt if you will ever recover from it once spam war settles down and shitcoin core gets completely obliterated. It will also likely affect Ten31, Opensats and Nostr.
You being CERTIFIED CORECUCK was not on my bingo card for this year.
the coward move would be to give in to your harassment and blindly recommend people run knots
go fuck yourself
More Parker Lewis, less Odells.
Thanks for showing your true color...!!!
Bitcoiners who like to give blind recommendation are running malware moron and Bitcoiners who understand bitcoin as a money are running knots.
GTFO...!!!
The source of corruption and compromise of the Core devs.
View quoted note →
View quoted note →
Do you know who see Bitcoin as data storage?
You guessed it, Citrea the shitcoiners.
Also Citrea EVM means Ethereum (shitcoin) Virtual Machine.
Jameson Lopp the shitcoiner is investor in Citrea.
"We're hearing things like Citrea is better than Ethereum," Chainway Labs co-founder Orkun Mahir Kılıç told CoinDesk. "It'll be better with time, because there's like $1 trillion, as of now, sitting in the Bitcoin blockchain. It is the most secure, battle-tested and decentralized blockchain. And we are bringing decentralized finance to it." 🤡🤡🤡
https://www.coinglass.com/news/91227
View quoted note →
Jameson Lopp the shitcoiner is investor in Citrea.
"We're hearing things like Citrea is better than Ethereum," Chainway Labs co-founder Orkun Mahir Kılıç told CoinDesk. "It'll be better with time, because there's like $1 trillion, as of now, sitting in the Bitcoin blockchain. It is the most secure, battle-tested and decentralized blockchain. And we are bringing decentralized finance to it." 🤡🤡🤡
https://www.coinglass.com/news/91227
musical version:
Scary conversation
“Is the end of gold redemption a big concern”
“Nope”
“Cool”
Vibes
1) citrea is shitcoin garbage
2) i don’t think citrea controls core devs
3) if you are concerned about core devs being desperate to take shitcoin money consider supporting independent funding orgs or donate to devs directly
Not all but majority of them. Their actions have root cause.
How would you explain their actions to blow up OP_RETRUN and this direct cause from Citrea?
How do you explain Core devs not fixing inscriptions spam?
See the compromised Core devs who rejected Luke's PR that fixes inscription spam. They are the bad actors (the NACKers)
They revealed themselves with their public comments on OP_RETRUN being dishonest and manipulative.
The guys that ACKed are the good guys we have.
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28408
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29187
Bitcoin Knots has fixed those issues.
View quoted note →
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28408
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29187
Bitcoin Knots has fixed those issues.
And lets not forget Core devs blocked pople on Github discussion just for mentioning Citrea.
Bitcoin Knots is not maintained by a single individual.
At least 10 devs deliberately contribute to Knots:
1 x.com/LukeDashjr, https://github.com/luke-jr
2 x.com/leo_haf, https://github.com/retropex
3 x.com/bigshiny90, https://github.com/bigshiny90
4 x.com/009Ataraxi71445, https://github.com/ataraxia009
5 https://github.com/pithosian
6 x.com/cguida6, https://github.com/chrisguida
7 x.com/1440000bytes, https://github.com/1440000bytes
8 x.com/dr0ther, https://github.com/dr0ther
9 x.com/Kurtis_NZ, https://github.com/KurtisStirling
10 https://github.com/kwsantiago
Any others?
View quoted note →
What are you running Odell?
So forcing all Bitcoin node runners to permanently store CSAM if it mistakenly gets mined is no concern at all? Nothing to see here
Okay, why doesn't everyone just shut up and listen to @npub132er...zmdh ? Maybe he has the right approach.
"just do nothing."
Seems like your promoting complacency.
Some of us want lightning to improve. Also, even NVK said he wants to see covenants. He's just saying in lieu of them he doesn't see a reason to upgrade. And he's right about that. What's alarming is that both major development teams are behaving like children, so those improvements we want seem further away than ever.
Yes just do nothing so commie core devs can easily turn bitcoin into ethereum or inefficient data storage.
Actively brushing over sharing child porn. Rad.
It's way bigger. This is more like gold confiscation
So inform yourself and recommend Knots NON-blindly🤦♂️
There's an actual fire tho
nope
seems more reasonable to run core 28 or 29
are you going to bring on more maintainers or is your plan to just keep shipping knots releases on your own
Please recommend 29, not 28. 29 enables zero-fee-commitments for lightning, which is a really important feature in some cases!
Odell, you used to be a hero to me in the Bitcoin community. The way you championed privacy and freedom tech (e-cash, CoinJoin, Mutiny Wallet, PayJoin etc) was inspiring. Your strong advocacy for freedom and your bold stance against KYC were important. You told those privacy-hating governments to go f© themselves. I loved that!
You seemed like a true freedom fighter. Now you don't take a clear stance in an important debate. It seems like you've adopted a more non-aggressive approach, avoiding clear expressions of your opinions and steering away from contentious issues. I first noticed this change in your stance regarding Saylor and open source development. Now I see you being quiet about the censorship and power grab by certain Core developers.
I hope I'm wrong. But it’s disappointing and disheartening to say the least.
nope
and having one person maintain the software for the majority of nodes on the network is probably worse than the status quo
View quoted note →
That proves how far off the mark core is in this case. The fact that so many people would change to software run by one developer should give them pause.
I'll agree that's a good solution but we expected better from core. They didn't have to make this change
We need more implementation teams. I find how both sides acted the last couple months to be what I'd expect out of a shitcoin project.
Wouldn't be surprised if this stupidity leads to a company with deep pockets coming out with a "Red Hat" version, either. Watched this same infighting shit play out in the Unix and *nix spaces.
you are a big disgrace, gfy dipshit.
agree, working on it
View quoted note →
Definitely. That happens when you decide funding through brink and can not accept that you actually gave money to a shitcoiner scammer compromised children who can code.
That’s 100% on core pushing through a contentious change.
thnx for this... I could have used this many times over the past five years.
You’re either new or retard or both if you think knots vs core matters. Congratulations on being a dumb fuck.
I have a question, is v30 the final decision by core team?
Everything that’s wrong with Bitcoin in one picture:
1) legitimate concerns quickly dismissed
2) trusting without verification
3) a well respected OG amplifying the former two
And it took us less than 2 decades to get this cucked.
View quoted note →
Out now on wavlake
#core30ismalware
@ODELL at the moment
I just want to say thankyou for the opportunity.
As institutional investors and retirement funds dump Bitcoin in response to core 30 release, it gives us the opportunity to buy the dip.
When enough idiots update to core 30 it will create a hard fork and obviously the blockchain WITHOUT THE CHILD PORN AND SPAM will retain the name Bitcoin.
After the fork all the investors and retirement funds will come back.
Because we've already seen this playout before.
Wait what? Since when are the node runners children?
The threat of childporn and malware is not a "think of the children"
It's a "making it more expensive and possibly illegal to run nodes will adversely affect node runners"
The child porn already exists, nobody is suggesting that core 30 will encourage people to hurt children.
The children in question have already been abused and the abuse material is already being circulated.
It's a threat to node runners and Bitcoin itself rather than a threat to children.
Although permanently hosting that kind of stuff may cause further trauma to those children that's not the actual concern here.
Anyway it doesn't matter because all that'll happen is that it'll create a fork and nobody will run the core 30 blockchain after it forks.
Bitcoin has already been through this before.
Same thing that happened last time will happen again
It definitely says a lot that you are encouraging others to update and potentially risk being imprisoned for hosting child porn while you yourself refuse to update.
🤔 Lately lots of "Bitcoin influencers" seem to be selling out/trying to scam the plebs
Twitter is dunning Kroger on steroids.
I'm missing something here.
that's messed up
wtf
What evidence do we actually have that Core has multiple devs? I mean, it could be like the mining situation - many names, sharing one template. The devs are many names, but one groupthink? Or worse, how do we know its actually them pushing the code? Anyway. Personalities don't matter. There needs to open competition between different implementations competing for maket share of the userbase. 21% of the network migrated to knots within one (?) release cycle - despite the dev concentration risk. That tells you a lot. The plebs have signalled: competition has begun massively. Bullish af. I'd love to see eg 5 implementations with at least 10% share each. Each side is going to have to up their game to grow market share now. Complacency is gone.
I love how you all uncritically buy the CP narrative the gatekeeping peddle you, rather than realizing this is them doing what they do, gatekeeping and dogmatically keeping purity and shunning sinners and disbelievers.
It's not about CP, it's about bringing DeFi to Bitcoin using zk proofs for finality on the Bitcoin L1.
No hard-fork needed, those are and will be valid transactions.
Thought you all enjoyed free markets? Or is that support wavered once the free market does things (like bitcoin defi) you don't want it to do?
These new bitcoiners, I swear. lol.
no version of core can detect inscriptions
Haven't all ODELL's pleasers who are paid (via OpenSats) to influence Bitcoin, disinformed masses at the 
and smear campaigned against the independent implementation of Bitcoin node, i.e. Bitcoin Knots? I think there are at least 9 of them on the list.
Bitcoin Core
Bitcoin Core development and transaction relay policy
Bitcoin Core development and transaction relay policy
Bad Actor
One respected manteiner >>>>>>> a bunch of mentally challenged kids with funds.
Only one maintainer ships each Core release.
The "on your own" has always been nothing but FUD.
🫂
Put out the fire.
View quoted note →
Yeah I was glad to see this. Kudos to those contributors!
That doesn't put out the fire, it turns up the heat.
Why do you want an airdrop so bad?
Why do you keep repeating the FUD and denying the problem? This is why people are losing trust in you.
the latest core release was signed by over ten people
the latest knots release was only signed by you
lol
Submit your consensus change or end the FUD.
Final decision on what? They changed defaults, you can change them in bitcoin.conf pretty easily…
Kudos 🤙
First its not FUD.
Second we run Bitcoin Knots.
Third coretards and compromised Core devs gaslighting is pathetic.
ODELL is the new Bitcoin Knots maintainer. LFG!!!
He’s a VC now. Things change when you sell out.
> explicitly created to prevent developer capture by corporate interests
That's simply not true at all.
This is why we shouldn't have heros. Good sign we are still growing though.
I'm going to remember this one for later.
Because when there's a consensus failure between participants, chain splits is how they get resolved.
Go bored of monero?
So.. are you saying you determine truth by following the biggest group of nitwits?
It would take less than that for you to think about it. It was a one-line claim that isn't true.
Yes, new standalone node implementations. But Knots > Core, very clearly for now
Most people are immature. You cannot expect the most vocal morons to always be the most reasonable people on that side. Mechanic has been very, very reasonable but a lot of the people following along just regurgitate talking points and are unreasonable pricks.
The additional trouble is that the core side did not even have any reasonable arguments whatsoever and everyone in charge of making decisions there acted in bad faith.
The man is unreasonable and unwilling to consider the argument from another perspective. He's decided what to believe. Pretty impressive how powerful self-delusion is. He's right to want additional implementations, and he doesn't have to trust you, but when it comes to addressing your arguments, well, he's just repeating talking points and not thinking for himself.
That post is really offensive, uniformed and inflamatory.
Plebs don't 'follow'.
Sure, we listen & watch, consider our options, absorb pure fire-from-the-gods level advice, get distracted by a psycopathically hard bit of freedom tech just... well because it's there, and then AT BEST, adjust out helm to converge on the (currently) shared vision.
'Follow'? How very dare you. 😉
Though I am on Knots side of the debate, I agree with you on this point. This is pretty much just harassment. Fellow Knots lovers, shut the fuck up, tone down your angry voices ok?
$ gpg --verify SHA256SUMS.asc
gpg: assuming signed data in 'SHA256SUMS'
gpg: Signature made Fri 10 Oct 2025 05:14:58 PM EDT
gpg: using EDDSA key 1A3E761F19D2CC7785C5502EA291A2C45D0C504A
gpg: Good signature from "Luke Dashjr (Codesigning) <luke-jr+git@utopios.org>" [unknown]
Primary key fingerprint: 1A3E 761F 19D2 CC77 85C5 502E A291 A2C4 5D0C 504A
gpg: Signature made Sat 11 Oct 2025 04:06:25 PM EDT
gpg: using RSA key 1D70CBE4B42239445617D33DD316C8140185B647
gpg: Good signature from "shiny (Bitcoin Knots attestations) <bigshiny90@gmail.com>" [unknown]
Primary key fingerprint: 1D70 CBE4 B422 3944 5617 D33D D316 C814 0185 B647
gpg: Signature made Mon 13 Oct 2025 09:41:15 AM EDT
gpg: using RSA key C1BCB7169AF1A07A0C5E471A047509FA0A6D7350
gpg: issuer "ataraxia.009.work@gmail.com"
gpg: Good signature from "ataraxia009 <ataraxia.009.work@gmail.com>" [unknown]
Primary key fingerprint: C1BC B716 9AF1 A07A 0C5E 471A 0475 09FA 0A6D 7350
Likely more coming... 29.1 had 7 signers.
He's dealing with a bit of harassment. In his mind that's a good excuse to blame you for it and also believe any other untrue things about you or Knots or Bitcoin that he feels like believing on a whim. Not justified reasoning but that is how most people think, sadly.
Eight, actually*
i checked both myself, please explain what is not true to all of us?
Yep, that's the main reason to switch to Knots, in addition to its respect for user choice.
Indeed he's choosing not to think it through and have a real stance. Even his refusal to commit to Knots is not based on reason, just propaganda.
Sadge indeed
more than 10 signatures: https://bitcoincore.org/bin/bitcoin-core-30.0/SHA256SUMS.asc
only your sig: https://bitcoinknots.org/files/29.x/29.2.knots20251010/SHA256SUMS.asc
anyone can verify that themselves, weird thing to lie about
Releases can only be signed by True Catholics, of which Luke is the only one (all other self proclaimed Christians are heretics according to Luke Logic)
The answer is obviously the most retarded: Luke considers all signatures from the Core version to be signatures for the Knots extension/fork.
Well didn't core change the definition of the feature? So reinstating the previous default parameter doesn't reinstate the previous feature.
You can’t reason with mentally ill delusionals hashtag Bitcoin’s savior hashtag ardent catholic aka the global boy rape cult
No. Changing the config to the previous default basically has the same outcome as the previous code.
Pls explain what "basically" means. Genuinely interested. Thanks.
Sunk cost fallacy. You funded evil. Stop your denial and move on.
Lol, "defi." Whatever you think that means, its a scam.
Yep. I've been on the knots side, or the "we need more options" side, but I've been annoyed by other people on this side using it as excuse to be nasty to people. They do more harm than good.
Enjoy your irrelevancy, pathetic stooge shill
I think you're wrong. Even if you're right, it doesn't really matter. Nobody's perfect. Educate, don't blame. Start up a podcast. Its just not right to turn on someone the moment they have a different opinion or are not thinking through it on your schedule.
There are 3 signatures in the Knots 29.2 signature file.
Your brainless retarded comment only shows your 0 intellect.
Does the great Odell not even know how to view a basic text file? 😂
I'd like to see more "don't trust - verify" on both sides. That's basically the same as "bring receipts." An passionate argument with no receipts is worthless, and conflating name calling with an argument is actually detrimental to the side people think they're on. Tbh I'm sick of seeing this. Wherever you see some doing this, even if they're on the same "side," fucking shut them down. Win by being right, not by bullying, and don't tolerate that crap.
There's already 3 signers for the builds, with likely more coming.
It is possible Luke swapped it out file at that path since Odell saw it but idk how likely that is. Idk
It’s signed by Luke and bigshiny90@gmail.com
Bitcoin’s sole intent.
Let’s keep on task please.
3 sigs as of this morning.. more guix happening. What are you even talking about?
3 signatures and counting, verified myself. Did you?
I attested all Knots releases since v25.1. knots20231115.
Haven't attested v29.2.knots20251010 yet because it just came out. Thanks for the reminder.
It matters for the ego; which is as good of reason as any
he swapped the file, look at the timestamp of the last sig
glad there are more signers
Signature file on GitHub says it’s 4 hours old. Did you verify when it first came out I guess?
curl -s "https://api.github.com/repos/bitcoinknots/bitcoin/releases/tags/v29.2.knots20251010" | jq '.published_at'
"2025-10-10T23:19:47Z"
Fax 📠 @ODELL
Oh shit. You said Go Fuck Yourself. Impressive 🫡
That’s when the release was published.
The signature file was updated at my local time 8:57AM today. Odell’s tweet was at 9:51AM.
Sounds like a misunderstanding
To be fair to him, judging by the timestamps, it doesn’t look like it was done as a response to your note.
But a few days ago was just a single signature.
curl -s "https://api.github.com/repos/bitcoinknots/bitcoin/releases/tags/v29.2.knots20251010" | jq '.updated_at'
"2025-10-13T13:57:16Z"
Correct
Shiny signed it 2 days ago atraxia an hour-ish before your note
GitHub
guix.sigs/29.2.knots20251010 at knots · bitcoinknots/guix.sigs
Bitcoin Knots release attestations (Guix). Contribute to bitcoinknots/guix.sigs development by creating an account on GitHub.
Running v28.01 until dust settles 🤙
True
Others are coming, including myself.
I sign all release of Knots since v25.1.
💯. Thanks for putting yourself out there and putting up with these fools.
And for reference Odells note about only one signature was at 2025-10-13T13:28:25Z and 30 minutes later 2025-10-13T13:57:16Z the signature file is updated on github with 2 more signatures.
He totally did.
The 2nd signature was created 2 days ago. Not sure when it was added to the GitHub release.
GitHub
guix.sigs/29.2.knots20251010 at knots · bitcoinknots/guix.sigs
Bitcoin Knots release attestations (Guix). Contribute to bitcoinknots/guix.sigs development by creating an account on GitHub.
Glad to see this discussion happening on Nostr, as it should be.
Are you gonna give it a try now? 😄
Yes. I am just correcting my criticism. Odell does in fact know how to read a text file 😂. The file was swapped out after he checked it.
👍 nice everyone shake hands.
@ODELL come up with a better reason why you don’t like knots
Looking forward to a 3rd implementation, I hate core more than I love knots.
Not that anyone cares about my opinion, but I think the reason for the lack of consensus with core vs knots is became everyone is arguing over tradeoffs.
It's a tradeoff between decentralization and censorship resistance.
We can't have 100% of both. There is a dial in between and where should we set that dial.
I don’t agree with that framing, filtering out a certain class of txns (spam) isn’t censorship.
Censorship is filtering out individual txns based on individual characteristics.
Filters have been around forever, they’ve been working just fine.
The busy body dumbfucks at core should have left things alone. If they wanted to tinker with fun little open source projects they should have found something else and left my money alone.
The only difference is the data can be split over a few more outputs (AFAIU), but the total data is limited to whatever you set.
Filtering out a certain class of transactions isn't censorship (agreed), but it does resemble ad blocker behavior which is a form of centralization. In ad blockers, they all query a centralized list, or have trended to do so. Gov can put pressure on anything that is centralized. Yes filters work. That's the problem and solution unfortunately. Hence tradeoff between censorship resistance and decentralization.
Then what's the point for the changes?
Why core team still want changes without consensus?
Please do. If I end up being the retarded one I’ll gladly eat a slice of humble pie.
Consensus on policy isn’t a thing? Anyone can change the config to anything they want, by definition there is no consensus.
Just keep running core 28 or 29 if you don't like knots
this still does not prove that bitcoin core is not compromised. the ethical thing to do is to push for no core upgrades
I'll eat mine now. I could be wrong already. I am a offgrid solar bitcoin miner. I know what it looks like to me. Never been called stuoid by a person who knkws me. And I don't understand why people call others names when having different POV. Why are we so obsessed with being right or wrong. We all can see it differently. Not sure if we will ever have consensus on who was right or wrong. Maybe. I am running knots because it makes more sense to me. Not sure what that makes me retarded.
Not sure most people are aware of the benefits (I'm not).
My understanding is that the commitment transaction is basically the transactions you are "passing around" with the other side of a lightning channel, your updates to the "bar tab". There is an issue that if these are too old, when you try to force close a channel, it fails because the fee to the miner is too low, so we need a mechanism for either side to bump the fee.
If this is correct, can you complete it with why is it important to support zero fee commitments and what exactly do they solve? (Or share a link 🙂)
Honestly think of the children would have been more compelling than "we don't want to do anything illegal."
Not sure when Bitcoin became about following the rules of terrestrial governments. Its whole value proposition is permissionlessness. Nobody says your node has to run on clearnet.
Pandering to governments seems more about NGU than anything else.
Sure, we'd shake off some folks with less conviction. But such crises are where Bitcoin has always proven itself and come through stronger.
If we could shake Larry Fink out that'd be the real trophy. If it's not clear why, perhaps check out Marty's conversation with Vince Lanci on the most recent @TFTC .
Mechanic is in!
There we go.
7 signers (so far) for Knots v29.2.knots20251010.
GitHub
guix.sigs/29.2.knots20251010 at knots · bitcoinknots/guix.sigs
Bitcoin Knots release attestations (Guix). Contribute to bitcoinknots/guix.sigs development by creating an account on GitHub.
VIRTUAL ZAP! ⚡️⚡️⚡️(tried twice..."unable to zap")
in hindsight my position on saylor was probably too aggressive, half of bitcoin twitter hates me for that
my position on this issue has been clear and transparent, discussed at length on both my shows and nostr for over a year
View quoted note →
Maybe you should have posted that in ALL CAPS?
Do you even listen to Optech Review Pod...? Do you even look at the blockchain. A huge OpReturn ~4MB was mined early in the year.. and none since that I'm aware of (most likely becuase it is cheaper to add data in other ways, sadly also more harmful to the network.. Would be FARR better if they were using OpReturn.. And no, I don't think we should be sensoring, our sensorship resistant money!
most people cannot handle the caps
too provocative
People need to adjust to the new normal in the Post Caps era.
there was a conference at the hotel i was staying at yesterday, topic was the new normal
this must have been what they were discussing
It is a proper and conservative stance. One that carries respect. I was running Satoshi v. 27.0/ for almost two years and it worked just fine. I now run knots but understand hesitance on switching with only one dev. I am a fan of node configurability and I believe my nodes resources should be spent on relaying legitimate transactions, not spam that happened to have a cryptographic signature.
Wish I could zap!
Slay your heroes