fILtErS pRoTeCt mY nOdE
Login to reply
Replies (64)
Ya me cansé, deberíamos dejar de pelear y concentrarnos en la adopción de btc
but people are wrong on the internet
I don’t think anyone believes that running knots protects their node. All the confirmed spam gets downloaded anyway.
half of them still don’t understand relay vs consensus, i dunno man
Coincido 👍
You sound like you like people telling what to do.
I'll see your meme, and I'll raise you: 
touche
no I just like mocking retards
You must not look in the mirror then
man can you at least riff a bit better, these insults are boring
I’m not deep on technical knowledge.
But, I run knots because I refuse to repay spam to other nodes. We just need more options. I don’t think Core taking away agency from plebs is good. I also don’t think a fifth of the network being in Luke’s hands is a good thing either. We’re in a shitty situation.
I don't get it, if filters do nothing, why does core devs care ?
Yes it seems most people running knots don’t have deep technical knowledge of a very complex system, yet they are convinced they are correct. Pretty amazing.
I care about truth and battling fake narratives to defend the project. As any person who wants bitcoin to succeed long term should do, especially since I have dedicated 15 years of my life to this goal.
No one needs to do anything outside of the consensus rules
cores is the ones doing unneeded interventions because of their fears
I like that you go hard in the paint
filters allow node runners to have an ongoing discussion and voice in the never ending political debate of what they consider spam and what not. It is not censorship, because it wont prevent anything to get into the chain with 100% certainty, but it probabilistically reduces the amount of certain types of transactions showing up on chain.
It also prevents you as the node runner from having e.g. CSAM in your node and prevents you as the miner from committing CSAM to the blockchain.
There are data storage systems, even decebtralized ones for people to store data.
In Bitcoin, every node runner stores data for free forever, so at least node runners should have their voice to express their opinion what should get into that forever storage.
@jb55 knows about Bitcoin more than @npub1qg8j...24kw, did he just call him a retard?
@calle, irrational exuberance aside, what's your take on respectable opinions taking the stance against lifting OP return limits, such as below:
https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2025/09/06/adam-back-joins-fight-for-the-soul-of-bitcoin-over-jpeg-spam
This is not a matter to be dismissed as demagoguery as @npub1qg8j...24kw is one of the key figures in Bitcoin space.
View quoted note →
op return limits don’t affect JPEG usage? you can just put them in witness data
Ok makes sense, so you think they do something but not protect people's nodes. Which, to the best of my knowledge is accurate. Ty 4 answering !
Read the article.
Mr. Back is against removing the limit, is he a retard? You guys seem way to arrogant when addressing this issue, to put it mildly.
I'll take you seriously when you stop making ad hominem attacks and appeals to authority and start making actual points.
I don’t care if you take me seriously, i don’t know who you are or care
I don't care who you are either if your argument sucks.
We've actually met before, by the way. Not that you care, apparently.
Most people running Core don’t have deep technical knowledge of Bitcoin software.
There are technically proficient people on both sides of Knots/Core. I haven’t heard a good argument for raising the limit. I’m all ears though.
Filters protect Bitcoin
Not hard to comprehend really 🫡
He will only post some BS from other spooks, as he can't formulate his own thoughts on the topic.
🫡✌️
🤣🤣🤣
😁
I smell BSV.
There isn’t one. That’s why it’s all memes and calling people retards. The idea that not raising the op_return limit is some existential threat to Bitcoin is laughable. They don’t actually give a shit about the limit - it’s about winning. They want to know that when they DO change something of significance they can get it done. Core devs are the biggest threat to Bitcoin
I am running Knots right
now. It is about sending a message.
You are the one proposing the change. Every node currently defaults to filters. Do you actually take your node today and change the setting?
Every node currently defaults to filters so the entire network is retarded?
Update to b-core v30 or you are racist
How is it a “fake narrative” bro?
Every node defaults to op_return filters currency- and most op_returns are under the filter limit.
This is intellectual dishonesty.
They absolutely do something because the vast majority of op_returns currently on the time chain are under the filter limit.
Devs have lost it
Publicly exposing your retardation is brave. Go for it.
“I trust the military industrial complex, removing the government’s ability to print money and go to war isn’t a threat to palantir. They definitely want what’s best for bitcoin. Trust the mainstream, trust the devs, trust the new code.”
View quoted note →
Satoshi in response to the threat of spam entering the block chain, “That’s one of the reasons for transaction fees. There are other things we can do if necessary.” - Satoshi Nakamoto 2010
Now fuck off with your lies.
unfollowed
i don't even know who you are
Now do Satoshi saying "glowies will use dumb arguments about Bitcoin to distract from the genocide in Gaza"
(He never said this one sadly)
Every single comment is calling him out, and yet he doubles down. What kind of behavior is this?
View quoted note →
Yeah, it's really sad.
Sounds like your problem, not theirs
Not as cool looking as you think. I mean, to sycophants, yes, but to everyone else. No.
In other words, they're too dumb, which is the other argument. Those are the two. They're not a dev. They're too dumb. Is there another one?
You still don't get it with how smart you think you are... let's see if Jimmy explains it to you.
Forget about filters and address the real concerns. Then we might actually get somewhere:
View quoted note →
Old methods of storing evil stuff required obfuscation: they would need to break it up into multiple chunks and reassembly would require specific software and knowledge of what the data is and how to reconstruct and interpret it exactly.
The old formats looked like this:
"Hi, I'm a Bitcoin transaction, here's my first output of 45 outputs - <filepart1>, here's my second output <filepart2>, here's my third output<filepart3>" along with a tonne of other stuff that has to get parsed out when processing the highly obfuscated material. This is thankfully also true of inscriptions.
OP_RETURN however is just a dump for raw, serialized data. It's not the same.
It says the equivalent of "Hi I'm a Bitcoin transaction, here's an unspendable output: <file> end".
This wasn't a problem for tiny OP_RETURNs i.e their current limit of 80 bytes.
If they're permitted to be 100kb, that's where the abuse begins.
And that's the end of plausible deniability.
When the stuff gets processed - which it has to be for your node to verify that they are valid transactions - then you just have a raw, unadulterated file that will trigger primitive antivirus/forensics software to alert the user: "Hi, you have CP on your computer."
You now need a licence to run a Bitcoin node, everyone thinks you're disgusting if you do, and they're not even wrong.
View quoted note →
Unfortunately jb is the one who does not undestand technical details, even when written as simple as possible.
Let alone to consider consequences of such changes (below in the picture)
Old methods of storing evil stuff required obfuscation: they would need to break it up into multiple chunks and reassembly would require specific software and knowledge of what the data is and how to reconstruct and interpret it exactly.
The old formats looked like this:
"Hi, I'm a Bitcoin transaction, here's my first output of 45 outputs - <filepart1>, here's my second output <filepart2>, here's my third output<filepart3>" along with a tonne of other stuff that has to get parsed out when processing the highly obfuscated material. This is thankfully also true of inscriptions.
OP_RETURN however is just a dump for raw, serialized data. It's not the same.
It says the equivalent of "Hi I'm a Bitcoin transaction, here's an unspendable output: <file> end".
This wasn't a problem for tiny OP_RETURNs i.e their current limit of 80 bytes.
If they're permitted to be 100kb, that's where the abuse begins.
And that's the end of plausible deniability.
When the stuff gets processed - which it has to be for your node to verify that they are valid transactions - then you just have a raw, unadulterated file that will trigger primitive antivirus/forensics software to alert the user: "Hi, you have CP on your computer."
You now need a licence to run a Bitcoin node, everyone thinks you're disgusting if you do, and they're not even wrong.
View quoted note →
It only raising the limit, but *removing the ability to change it at all*
They chose “our way or the highway” and are gaslighting the people who chose the latter
Anyways, run Knots or Knobs.
#Memes #Memestr #DankMemes #Nostr #Zap #Laughstr #Jokestr #LOL #Comedy #Funny #Crypto #Bitcoin #BTC #StackSats #Sats #BitcoinCore #Core #BitcoinKnots #BitcoinKnobs
View quoted note →
#Memes #Memestr #DankMemes #Nostr #Zap #Laughstr #Jokestr #LOL #Comedy #Funny #Crypto #Bitcoin #BTC #StackSats #Sats #BitcoinCore #Core #BitcoinKnots #BitcoinKnobs
Keep digging bro
I think the threat of CSAM being on Bitcoin's blockchain is a pretty real concern.
So other than ad hominem attacks you have nothing to add to the discussion? Not a good look.
Love what you do and keep going .
Lol