Bitcoin Core Going Rogue?
Login to reply
Replies (37)
I’ve been contemplating switching my nodes to Knots for some time now, but this recent incident has convinced me to make the switch asap.
Very interesting! Every time there is drama with Bitcoin Core devs I get a bit worried with their incentives...
View quoted note →
The video I was waiting for. I'm about to watch, but had to comment first. Cheers!
Great video. Learned a lot in such a short period of time.
I dont think it's 'bitcoin core' as such, that's a broad term. There are some misguided views, but the ecosystem is demonstrating an immune system. Let's not forget the track record of core as the one of the more successful open source projects in the last decade. Most are good, but there might be some bad ideas. Or, as they say, in the linux world "most ideas are bad ideas" ...
Thank you for taking the time to try and understand some of the nuances. I had a fairly good idea, but not exact. Looking forward to seeing potential responses, but seems unlikely that anything like this is a good idea for a monetary network.
I listened to a lot of discussions for ordinals/runes and I just don't see these uses needing to be directly on the timechain. Seems as if they could be on an L2 or some other solution, but generally people seem to want to jam extra info it into the timechain in a sub-optimal way.
After reading a few posts I understand that there are some rules about not personally "targeting" someone on the github, but pointing out facts/concerns and not being able discuss it as adults is childish. Instead of banning, maybe all it would take is removing personal name(s) from the original post and make it focused on the incentive problem and the company?
Any time I’m trying to figure out what’s going on in BTC world, @Matthew Kratter comes in with a clutch video
View quoted note →
Was saylor right?
while i think it’s disgusting to put bloat on chain, isn’t it just a function of not enough demand for block space?
full monetary premium cannot lose to not fully monetary premium, in principle.
demand for block space will push all bs away when it’s there
so while i hate the idea of spam, they are paying for it when others won’t.
we aren’t entitled to cheap block space, i think it just shows how undervalued bitcoin and its block space are right now. my 2 sats
i hate it, like i hate other forms
of degeneracy, but i dont think it changes bitcoin
Still waiting on a new video from Bitcoin Mechanic.
View quoted note →
Thanks for explaining whats going on @Matthew Kratter !
@Bitcoin Mechanic perhaps this is an opportunity to start using `ngit` for social interactions around the bitcoin core repo.
Ngit creates nostr events for commits, pull requests and issues and there is a nostr client (gitworkshop) for interacting with these events. Essentially this nostr client acts as a proxy between you and the git server, so you can continue to share a repo with users who are still doing social interactions on github.
@DanConwayDev is maintaining this and it has made tremendous progress since the last time a core dev (Fabian Jahr) tried it out. This controversy could be an opportunity to move away from the network effects on GitHub..
Found this. Maybe it helps.
Matthew Kratter
Bitcoin Core Going Rogue?
Bitcoin Core devs have been co-opted by unethical bullshit. I'm running knots already on my full node. Consider doing that too. Arbitrary data below 83 bytes is fine by me, though my settings are at 42 to prevent Ordinals. Any more than that and I think you should be paying significantly more bitcoin to get it done.
Censorship equals control……..
God willing #Ocean continues to increase their hash rate and it goes parabolic…….
Thanks for the explanation, Matthew. I am a Bitcoin only pleb that hates ordinals and inscriptions, but I can see both sides of this issue. I think the limits on op_return is what led to jamming the segregated data with garbage. Doing the same with op_return would have been less harmful to the block chain and node runners. As such, I see the merit of trying to push garbage into the op_return format which can be more easily pruned and ignored.
With that being said, banning someone for pointing another's potential conflict of interest is stupid and childish at best, and at worse, it will chill appropriate and relevant disclosures in the future.
I’m glad I’m running knots!
Thank you Matthew!
Same.
🚨 Watch this before updating your node 🚨
Do NOT update your Bitcoin Core node past 28.1 until you watch this video and understand the implications.
View quoted note →
This is going on right now:
nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzpprrqa5g5z0vzy5k06c9gnnc485gcj84qufv88k5j8ljkmaqrxhgqy8hwumn8ghj7mn2w4khqtndv5hszythwden5te0dehhxarj9ekxzmny9uqzqvjuuget8yrmhphpp2y9lcj6dd8gfeqd7eh9cfmc5exzh6njlawva7tza6
Made me wanna run a node asap 🫣
*/*ya*****
t *Y* Mattew A+gain asAllwayz/*****
I'm absolutely horrified
There is also Radicle 
Radicle: the sovereign forge
Sovereign code infrastructure.
Isn't this exactly why #bitcoin core should be ossified!
#askNostr
Todd also wants tail emissions. Not sure why anyone trusts that guy at this point.
Very fast way to get up to speed on the OP_Return discussion.
I'm switching to Bitcoin Knots.
View quoted note →
Summary for the plebs:
The "Bitcoin Core Going Rogue" controversy centers on a proposed pull request (PR) in Bitcoin Core that would allow more non-financial data, such as inscriptions or NFTs, on Bitcoin’s blockchain. Critics argue this could bloat the blockchain, increase block sizes, and make it harder for regular users to run nodes, potentially undermining Bitcoin’s decentralization and usability as a currency. Concerns include reduced efficiency, higher costs for node operators, and a shift toward Bitcoin becoming a data storage platform. Some allege conflicts of interest among developers and investors pushing the change, and there are claims of censorship, with objectors reportedly banned from discussion forums. Bitcoin Core’s maintainers, however, operate on a consensus-driven process, and no single entity controls the codebase, though debates persist about the direction of development.
Grok
Also, this gives a good summary of what's going on right now:
nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzpprrqa5g5z0vzy5k06c9gnnc485gcj84qufv88k5j8ljkmaqrxhgqy8hwumn8ghj7mn2w4khqtndv5hszythwden5te0dehhxarj9ekxzmny9uqzqvjuuget8yrmhphpp2y9lcj6dd8gfeqd7eh9cfmc5exzh6njlawva7tza6
I do, too, since I saw that video from Bitcoin Mechanic today.
They want to remove a config. That is the issue
Agree
Thanks for posting your videos on Nostr
downloading Knots now
The Bitcoin core devs are making changes that do not benefit Bitcoin.
Here is some history from myself and others if you want to know more:
nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzp6pmv65w6tfhcp73404xuxcqpg24f8rf2z86f3v824td22c9ymptqyv8wumn8ghj7enfd36x2u3wdehhxarj9emkjmn99uq32amnwvaz7tmjv4kxz7fwv3sk6atn9e5k7tcprfmhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuem9w3skccne9e3k7mf0wccsqgra6vnf7sc33vj356ak75430ungrulrndajawp3g45y6ndzyu6hwch652na
nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzpprrqa5g5z0vzy5k06c9gnnc485gcj84qufv88k5j8ljkmaqrxhgqy8hwumn8ghj7mn2w4khqtndv5hszythwden5te0dehhxarj9ekxzmny9uqzqvjuuget8yrmhphpp2y9lcj6dd8gfeqd7eh9cfmc5exzh6njlawva7tza6
nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzqpxfzhdwlm3cx9l6wdzyft8w8y9gy607tqgtyfq7tekaxs7lhmxfqqsg0ewq767afwyzhcp6gnmxyrutcvuzy3h2d2y8pvwugn0h6hp8fcq6ve5r3