I think my problem with this game theory perspective is that 18.000 nodes is not really sufficient is it? Clearly then, 78.000 nodes didn't signal they wanted this change, so despite 18.000 being a significant amount of nodes it is not an overwhelming amount of nodes, right?

My other problem is, when core made the op return change, that made me mad, and I felt I had to stand up and show that I wouldnt be bullied to run that on my node, so I signalled hard by running knots. But then knots implented code that I wasnt comfortable with, including automatic signaling for bip110 and even worse, automatically including the code for a hard fork. Bear in mind, I've followed as much as I could on the sidelines from running a busy family life, so I might have misunderstood many details, but this is my understanding on things so far. And so my point is, knots included code that I was suddenly "forced" to run and thats not okay either. All of that is fixable by just not updating my node, but as bitcoiners, we deserve better options than "just dont update".

i still think. delete taproot. and to do that we need to find a way to fork the chain that survives any attempts by the establishment to try and break it with protocol exploits. bip-110 was too cautious, and too easy to ignore.

It seems that AntPool was completely ignorant (minded 961632 immediately) and Foundry hesitated and mined their first block after deadline (961635) only after 1 hour 26 minutes.

It is proof that the current bitcoin network is just fiat 2.0. Its a good thing. We know that all the influencers in the space are just digital versions of your everyday wallstreet bro. This is valuable information. It allows our focus to be on seeking out a money that does have sound principles. The value of coins on the current network won't go to $0 fiat, but it will be price controlled and institutions will slowly bleed everday people dry, just like they have for hundreds of years with fiat. Your wallstreet bros will continue with their hype and price predictions and silly shenanigans while normal people get bled dry. Eventually it will be evident that the only nodes on the network are controlled by institutions, because the everday Joe doesn't want to commit resources to supporting a network that is captured. All of this is valuable information to those who still want the world to have sound money. Eventually we will. They can kill the current iteration of the network, but they can never kill the ideas behind bitcoin.

It shows the miners incentives do not align with the ideals of sound money. Satoshi stated bitcoin depends on miners being "honest". We found out miner centralization has caused them to be structurally unsound .

So miners told you for month, we will not do this. So why would you assume otherwise? Because three retards with zero track record of success told you they would?

BIP-110 is still the right call.

I'm not sad or angry because beep 110 was left behind, in fact this is starting to raise more questions for me to know how the bitcoin community really is. yesterday showed me something much bigger, it no longer matters if you run your own nodes, that knots have helped more people access bitcoin thanks to the limitation of space in the blocks or that you learn to connect your wallets to these nodes, the only ones that really matter now are mining companies that have almost infinite energy to generate blocks faster than a mining pool that makes it slower. I think I'm already starting to understand a little why the monero community criticizes the current state of bitcoin a lot.