Replies (54)

yay, maybe we pressed pause. but bip110 blocks real solutions. block new taproot txs. add schnorr based quantum shielded addresses. and bulletproofs. miners need to be paid too. lightning was too effective.
csam is irrelevant. 4mb, not enough for even hd images. luke is controlled opposition. the real issue is miners optimize for yield. the real issue is bitcoin blocks should be for clearinghouse. lightning solved payments too effectively
Got #BIP110? This is when compromised and corrupted Core cucked to spammers, scammers and shitcoiners. image
FreedomMoneyIsFuture's avatar FreedomMoneyIsFuture
They don't love Bitcoin Freedom Money. They love abusing Bitcoin with spam for their own grifts and scams, just like on Ethereum. See below what Ethereum is. image View quoted note →
View quoted note →
If that mail wasn't fake it would clearly mean that Foundry was against bip110 as clearly asking members to vote with any non vote counting as "no", a " yes" outcome is impossible to happen. If there was any demand to signal bip110, a pool will just provide an alternative endpoint for those users.
"iT's eXaCtLy tHe sAmE aS tHe rEd bLuE gAmE tHeOrY!!!" yeah, sure it is, IF choosing red also signals your consent to on demand anal probes and surveillance. It sets a dangerous precedent for random governance and disabling/limiting privacy features, limiting bitcoin based smart contracts and future impulsive chain splits/forks. All in an attempt to limit spam that will still be possible and has been possible for ages via many different mechanisms. If you still don't get it, justify the 55% "consensus" threshold. This smells a lot more like a shitcoiner motivated attack than a purist "bitcoin is solely money" principled stand. Bitcoin Script was there from the very beginning and taproot has been in the works for ages. You want a better bitcoin than what is being maintained by core for over a decade? Chose from one of the 50 million shitcoins or roll your own. Reducing the "consensus" threshold proves this is a contentious attack against real consensus by definition and is against the well established bitcoin ethos. Retards are here to "fix" bitcoin. Enjoy your hastily implemented minority fork and uniting with your malcontent comrades in the BCH and BSV crowds.
"I'm not a developer but I'm going to weigh in on a highly technical modifications to the first ever distributed governance protocol governing the first ever true freedom money because I have an opinion." Good stuff. Good luck with that.
BIP-110 is extremely simple, few lines of code, dEvEloPer, and its tested and discussed for a year already. All monetary functions of Bitcoin continue to work.
Bronek's avatar
Bronek 3 weeks ago
I love the fact that you put actual video here and not link to YouTube owned by big tech selling your data giant - Google
it doesn't delete taproot. it doesn't hash the receiver pubkey. it just stops the spam for a while. and blocks adding new witness programs which aren't spam.
with bip110 you can't just build a new tx. look it up. unless recognised by his majesty sir luke dash junior. things like bulletproofs, p2spkh
so you can just go and believe people won't shoot you when you steal their wallet, right? right? no consequences. all fake. belief system. fuckin communist.
Your entire statement can be summed up as "shitcoiner projection" Especially the part about BCH and BSV Core are the ones that removed the data cap. Your pedophile spam coin is the new BSV. You're the ones trying to turn Btc into media hosting instead of transaction data
well, it sure would help if there wasn't a witness discount. but how to get miners to agree with that.
Community warning: a shitfork shill who promotes the fork but refuses to swap sats to get more on its side, hence himself deeming it less valuable
Rob Hamilton 's avatar Rob Hamilton
It’s important to have a futures market with any contentious fork in Bitcoin. Why? Because the party forking gets what is called the “free call option”. They can tweet, do long monologue videos about how their fork will win, and how no one will oppose them. They can use company resources to legally pressure miners, post populist rhetoric disassociated from reality (pľēb şľőp) and then… wait. The activation comes, and they are delta neutral on a fork. If… No fork happens - they have their bitcoin. The fork is successful - they have their bitcoin. A chain split happens - they get Bitcoin on each side of the fork See the problem? There is an opportunity cost of time and resources coordinating the fork (maybe reputation too), but that’s it! They can antagonize the network at no cost of bitcoin. It’s worse than that though, everyone who told them they were wrong can’t even dump their hostile fork if they fail to even launch it. The actual party who has to put up material cost in a fork are the miners. Since they cannot mine on both chains at once, they must choose where to secure coins. The only publicly stated mining pool position on this fork is f2 pool opposing it (~12% of hash rate). My proposed on chain futures market requires no ecosystem coordination. The Bitcoin is settled automatically, and in the event there is a chain split, each side gets 2 BTC (each party gets the bitcoin they think will “win”). A futures market forces actors among the Bitcoin network with different opinions to put skin in the game, price the risk, and act. It presents an opportunity to lock up Bitcoin for a time, and profit as a rational actor if they have conviction in their position. The market will do this independent of your wishes otherwise. Via prediction markets, on chain, or exchange future markets (any exchange could get fees for swapping the fork to buy more bitcoin). We saw futures markets with the last contentious fork in 2017 when bitfinex listed futures. If no market forms at all, it shows there are not two sides to the market, I’m here as one side of the market, so we know the side that is a no show. This kind of weakness is death for a fork. If the side forking is unwilling to burn the ships, and put their bitcoin at risk, they are of low conviction and the fork will fail. There will be a myriad of reasons as to why people who are so vocal and certain that BIP 444 will activate, won’t bet. To be clear, it’s cope. Their optimal positioning as it relates to the opportunity to wager is: 1. Ignore 2. Public consider the bet, but to never commit. 3. Hand wave any reason to say the market is either immoral, illegitimate, impractical etc. Any of these maintains the illusion of strength when they are actually weak. A requirement in fork psychology is to appear as if it’s a certainty, because forking is a game of chicken with the network. A 1:1 ratio implies a 50% chance likelihood to succeed, far lower than they’d have you believe success is. Additionally, to counter offer with a differnt ratio/odds gives up the game. They blink, show their hand and signal that they think 50% is way to high of a likelihood, and all the bluster comes tumbling down. I’ve given feedback on the GitHub already from a technical perspective my objections to the BIP, they went largely unaddressed before the GitHub was locked. Notice who will continue engaging in this content without taking the bet, they are seeking attention because they must consume the discourse as their shred of a hope to win. Surely, there is already rumbling of restricting how 444 works, already a weakening of their position. People will say I am wrong, but won’t take the wager. Makes you think right? I’ll give 10% of my potential winnings from the contract if you refer a BIP444 proponent into actually making the bet with me. So whenever you see someone talking about the certainty of this fork activating, link them to this post so we can both make some bitcoin!
View quoted note →
We've had over a decade of "I'm new to bitcoin and here to save it". Nobody is falling for your low value takes except morons. I sense either the same extreme and immature hubris or an alternative motive. Fed? Shitcoiner? Doesn't matter. Irrelevant. You'll learn the easy way or the hard way. If it does manage to fork and survive more than a block, be sure to put your money where your mouth is by selling all of your bitcoin and investing it all in your new shitcoin fork. Shitcoiners never learn.
FreedomMoneyIsFuture's avatar FreedomMoneyIsFuture
My sweet summer child. So Citrea, backed by Palantir, Jameson SLopp and other shitcoiners and scammers, while telling you about their 🤡zero knowledge🤡 and 🤡defi🤡 and how Bitcoin is just a database, launched a 💩shitcoin💩 on top of Bitcoin. Compromised Core facilitate them all the way, the malware Core V30+ is a direct result. Are you that naive? View quoted note →
View quoted note →
FreedomMoneyIsFuture's avatar FreedomMoneyIsFuture
By Arthur The Capture by @hodlonaut in 1 image. Readme file Jan 6, 2009: "Bitcoin is an electronic cash system". Readme file 2022: "Bitcoin is an experimental digital currency". May 9, 2022 Core maintainer @laanwj argues "What is Bitcoin is very much up for discussion, delete it." 1/3 image And so it happened that Bitcoin Core lost contact with the roots of Bitcoin. Here is where Bitcoin changed from a strictly monetary tool to a multipurpose database *also* to be utilised for sec data driven use cases, something that Satoshi disgusted. 2/3 h/t @LapiuPepe for pointing me here. Sources for the screenshots: BitcoinTalk (where original SourceForge files are posted), Github. 3/3
View quoted note →
Electronic cash requires privacy. "Temporarily" limiting underlying features that improve privacy is an attack. Simple majority low threshold consensus is an attack. You'll learn, or the people you influence to sacrifice their bitcoin will learn and you'll collect your paycheck for undermining the good works of others.
FUD? All monetary functions of Bitcoin Freedom Money continue to work. BIP-110 defends Bitcoin Freedom Money - THE Global Most Secure Decentralized Unconfiscatable Peer-to-Peer Scarce Hard Sovereign Permissionless Freedom Money, The Greatest Store of Value and The Strongest Hope for Humanity. You defend who? Faketoshi? Compromised and corrupted Core? Andy Back, the Epstein's friend? Saylor?
55% is self evidently not consensus and is unprecedented. There has always been and will always be spam on bitcoin and nothing that's being proposed by this divisive bip will prevent it. What it would do, if successful, which it won't be, is set a precedent for hasty, contentious forks that introduce new rules and limits with a low threshold that's sure to create a minority fork. This is a great way for low information "bitcoiners" to lose their value on, just like every other minority fork in bitcoin's history. The lower threshold only ensures it will turn out worse than the others. Watch your fork pump and then dump to be worth a tiny % of the value (usage, exchange rate, users, hashrate, etc.) just like BCH and BSV, as holders dump their minority bonus shitcoin dividend and swap them for bitcoin. Also, stop "arguing" like a little girl. Making cute mean names for people you oppose and throwing unsubstantiated claims around is not an argument. Your not winning anyone of value over with that tactic, only emotional tribal morons. Learn history or repeat it. Your choice.
You are one of them and your FUD reveals it. BIP-110 will win. In addition to being real BIP run by more than 19% of the Bitcoin nodes, its also an idea that will continue, the idea of Bitcoin Freedom Money and you can't kill an idea especially one that its time has come.
FreedomMoneyIsFuture's avatar FreedomMoneyIsFuture
By Toronto Hodl They slept their way into Core They removed spam filters They deleted node-wallets on upgrade They censored your comments on forums They said you don't matter They went to Epstein island They have accused you of pleb-slop They called you a knotzi They DDOS'd your Knots Node IBD They promoted treasury companies They promoted their mining ponzi's They promoted scams and spams They told you to fork off They sold you a product that exposed your life savings ...and the story isn't over... THEY HAVE BEEN CONSISTENTLY WRONG. If you are still supporting them, you are part of the problem. Stop fighting plebs. Join the plebs, against the scammers, spammers and suits. Plebs are Bitcoin. Get your Bitcoin off coldcard-generated wallets. Run BIP-110.
View quoted note →
How'd your prediction age? Bip-110 failed spectacularly. I'm sorry for your psychological loss. You should be thankful the minority fork was way too short to even garner the capacity to facilitate separating you from your bitcoin, thereby also leading to a financial loss. Bitcoin has proven it can thwart yet another obvious attack despite your opinion and confidence to the contrary. The low "consensus" threshold turned out to be a really bad idea. Imagine that. Reflect and correct, then move on wiser for it. Or ignore the valuable feedback, rationalize for the sake of your ego then double down and join the ranks of BCH, BSV and hapless nocoiners like the r/Buttcoin hoardes. The choice is yours. Bitcoin doesn't care. Good luck!
So from now on only 90%+ majority miner forks are needed for success because nodes are irrelevant? To me that would be centralization. Good luck.