Replies (130)
Amen 🙏
They are simply following the fiat playbook… thanks Jack and co
“why won’t they have productive dialogue with us”
It’s always been amusing to me that the knots influencers don’t like or use Nostr, given Nostr is the largest community of people who use bitcoin as money every single day.
all larp no action
Bullish signal for nostr if someone seriously thinks it has that much influence
If you think people are using bitcoin as a drop box, then nothing about bip110 fixes the issue. Anyone who is willing to go through the process and expense to use bitcoin in this manner is not going to be stopped by the changes. You can still store as much data on chain as you want in a post 110 world. It will be slightly less practical.
On the downside you will prove that a retarded influence campaign can modify Bitcoin.
We are so bored this is what we're talking about.
We need real problems 😂
Literally a fictitious post. Maybe one guy said something but it’s not a widely held belief or even close to that.
I like Nostr , am I a socially divisive toxic maxi psychopath ? Oh I do hope so 😉
Same as shitcoiners that ignore lightning exist and works.
Bitcoin is proof that you can give people drama free money and they will still create drama
well said
There's a lot of rhetoric flying around, but underneath all that, this is what Knots is about:
Core used to have a mempool policy which set a default limit on certain field sizes... Since most people ran the default settings, it worked and allowed the mempool to (mostly) keep people from abusing the blockchain by using it to store data unrelated to monetary transactions.
But Core chose to remove that policy filter. This fundamentally changed Bitcoin from being a monetary network to being a file storage network..
Knots is a response to that change. Knots restored the field size limits as part of consensus code so it can't be removed..
Knots has no intention of filtering legitimate transactions of any kind, it just caps field sizes to prevent it from being used as anything other than pure money.
i run core 29
there is a lot of work being done on libbitcoinkernel which should make it much easier to offer consensus valid alternative implementations
more choices for node operators is strictly better, opensats is focused on this
Please don’t take any more funds from Jack Dorsey for open sats.
Thank you.
Thanks for the input, appreciate. btw I can't zap you.
Thanks for the ad hominem 👍
The whole point is to make it less practical.
The policy filters were doing a halfway decent job of keeping spam out.. it wasn't 100% effective, but it at least created a barrier against low effort spam.
But Core rolled out the red carpet and now even allows the low effort spam in.
Think of it like an ad-blocker. They're not 100%, but they do a decent job. It's better than NOT having an ad-blocker... The problem is that the entire node network needs to run the filter for it to work.
I'm new to the whole nostr thing, I'll see if I can get that set up
Filipe Martinho
@ODELL a verified account with your name just posted "gm stay humble and stack sats" on X. Is this you? If it's fake, it seems to have fooled many people
View quoted note →
BTC would be at $3billion each had we all kept MySpace. #Fact
Rising... more like leavened bread than a rocket... but still rising. LFG!.
There have been zero large op returns in January….because large op returns are not desirable.
libbitcoinkernel is an experimental, stateful C++ library project within Bitcoin Core aimed at extracting and modularizing the consensus engine—the core logic that validates blocks and transactions. Unlike the deprecated libbitcoinconsensus, which was stateless and limited to script validation, libbitcoinkernel is designed to manage state, support caching (e.g., for script and signature verification), spawn threads, perform I/O, and eventually manage dynamic components like the mempool.
gradually then suddenly
Good. Division is our strength. The better question is why aren't there 19 different node implementations instead of 2?
Not just "knots influencers," youre certainly doing plenty of dividing yourself
Are you able to zap me now?
Hes a social media influencer, so everything has to be about dividing and pitting sides against each other for interaction
how so
trying my best, open to improvement
nope and you are being a hypocrite here
🤙🧡
There are knots influencers?
Look, I know your game. Spend hours talking nonsense FUD about Quantum (nobody cares) and never addresses the real problem: that your funded boys turning the reference client in a liability for us, the real node runners. Who is making this sissy claiming about Nostr? Who cares? The reality is that you don´t have nothing, not once argument, to defend this atrocity, nor you or anibody in the Core side. So BIP 110 my friend. The battle is at the consensus level. I said it and I say this again, V30 is the nail in the coffin for all of you. By the way, if you were coopted and you and your love ones are at risk, my apologies in advance.
This post lol
takes time, money, and manpower
but a bunch of us are working on distributing protocol dev and increasing options
The problem with saying one side is co-opted is that the other side could be, too, and neither is verifiable.
By calling you out for being divisive?
Sure, that tracks bro lol
There are influential bitcoiners who support running knots. Meanwhile Odell is an actual social media influencer 😂
core centralization is a concern and is being improved without a consensus change
spammers can get around bip 110 restrictions and it sets a precedent for utxo seizures, the "temporary" aspect is a fucking scam because it just means you will have to do it again in a year, or admit it was all a waste of time in the first place, it is a soft fork being pushed without anywhere close to consensus, so it will either result in a chain split or die due to apathy
this post is a response to others attacking me first
i will not back down to assholes, asshole
Valid. And i know Jack shit about this subject so don't take it like I'm saying that with any authority whatsoever.
Sometimes its not about core vs knots, sometimes its just that you suck
you guys have to make up your mind on whether i am in charge of an elaborate conspiracy against bitcoin or “i do nothing”
but it can’t be both
All I said is that you suck 😂
youre certainly doing plenty of dividing yourself
Oh my bad, thought this was in reponse to my other comment.
Ive never claimed youre a part of a conspiracy, I only claimed that you suck
Stop with your collectivist nonsense
Go shill feudalism like your brother lol
I call out bullshit when I see it. You made this a core vs knots thing because you have an agenda
Chain split? So be it. Concern about utxo size? Support the cat. The only honest spammer apologiest was J. Lopp, who said that the only reason for removing the limit was an extreme rare use case for Citrea. Don't take us for fools please.
Every accusation is a confession, they're exposing their identity.
View quoted note →We did. Saylor left and many of the OGs use x instead. Mainly because Hodl culture is virtue signaling and dogmatic.
You can’t beat the major institutions that have unlimited fiat money by holding Bitcoin in a box. You need to have savings yes, but also use strategic leverage and spend only Bitcoin (as much as possible). You cannot serve two masters
Division in Bitcoin is what makes it anti-fragile.
Who are these influencers? I have no idea what is happening on Twitter. Anyway, the idea that "Nostr divides Bitcoin" is absurd.
jews defending pedos as always
View quoted note →We do use NOSTR but you very likely ignore or mute them.
another jew defending pedos
im surprised
I only mute bots on Nostr, and I only block bots on X. Although I know many knots influencers have blocked me on X and probably muted me on Nostr.
Ignore then, as far as I see anyway. I assume you are a pretty busy guy.
This is true. The ignoring is not usually purposeful, I just don’t see everything. However, if I do see something that is low signal and intentionally hostile, I will typically ignore unless I’ve had a few beers.
> Chain split? So be it.
i do not think v30 should have been pushed through but it was not a
protocol change to bitcoin, it was a change to default node policy of those who choose to upgrade
fuck citrea but they launched and dont even use it
i have never supported a contentious change to bitcoin, but you do
View quoted note →I just checked my node. Here are the violations according to the BIP110 rules for January 2026:
Witness element over 256 b: 0.2428%
Output over 34 b: 0.117%
Taproot annex: 0.0009%
Data push over 256 b: 0.0005%
Op_return over 83 b: 0.0005%
Control block over 257 b: 0%
The total sum of bytes over these limits is 681 Mb this month. 99.8% of that excess came from inscriptions.
Who said that?
I can’t wrap my head around why so many on NOSTR are SPAMMERS, SPAM Apologists, SMAM Enablers. I wouldn’t have ever guessed they would flourish here.
It sure would be nice if the excess data was in a provably unspendable and prunable part of the ecosystem.
You cannot stop transactions you don’t want. They can simply make them smaller and more numerous which ironically will bloat the chain even more.
"Interesting points! It's always good to have diverse perspectives on these complex topics. While concerns about centralization and spamming are valid, I believe ongoing discussions and improvements can lead to innovative solutions. Let’s keep the dialogue open and explore all angles! #CryptoCommunity"
Forcing them to split the witness elements across many transactions increases the cost of spamming the network. That would mean fewer people do it. It also means more money for miners.
The biggest win would be that it would effectively kill the image/audio/video inscriptions. Only the text based inscriptions would be practical after being split.
But ultimately the point is to send a message to them that non monetary transactions aren't welcome. But instead Core chose to open the doors for them.
If money for miners is a consideration than encouraging spam should be the policy. You can’t have that argument and be anti spam. Splitting the transactions doesn’t stop images and video. Data is data. If a video has to be compiled from a million transactions it is trivial to design a system that does that.
From my perspective I much rather have data in op return that can be ignored than to have millions of transactions that can’t. I do not believe sending a signal that Bitcoin doesn’t like spam is going to change anything. I don’t think changing this stuff actually matters all that much. Feels like virtue signaling at best.
Imagine what the transaction cost would be on sending a video in a single transaction instead of 1000 transactions. That sounds like a deterrent to me.
I think objectively there is way less bitcoin discussion (especially from the technical/privacy/lightning crowd) on twitter than there was Pre-Nostr. It's easy to look here on nostr and see that discussion still happening and conclude maybe it's related.
Also though, you okay man? you normally don't angry post but this feels like one
My consistent argument for why I choose knots and am leaning pro-110 is because spam is also a form of censorship, with a much larger area of collateral damage than what Knots proposes. This one transaction below highlights that you can censor MANY transactions with one abuse of the inscription bug, easily. If people are arguing that limiting this type of transaction is censorship, then I'm arguing it actually frees up room for thousands of real people to transact. It's objectively spam and before Core 30 was thought of as so. I never called core people pedophiles or hopped on board the "legal argument" train. I just think the direction regarding spam that core has gone and miners have gone, is bad for bitcoin and more people should consider we can put an end to it if we get together on this issue.
He (supposedly) made an X account for a day, and its already affected him 😂
2?
1. Bitcoin Core
2. Bitcoin Knots
3. btcd
4. libbitcoin
5. bcoin
6. NBitcoin
7. bcoin
8. BitcoinJ
I bet there's more, even more than 19 different.
You could use the entire block in. Single transaction and you would have a video of less than 4mb at a cost of over 3k usd. To do the same thing in 10000 transactions across several blocks the cost would be 2x to 2.5x more expensive and. cause 30% more chain bloat. In the end it’s a short low quality video that’s impractical beyond novelty. Having it broken into small pieces doesn’t change anything beyond the cost and bloat.
I guess you have to ask yourself if 30% more chain bloat is a reasonable trade off for your virtue signal?
I did not know that! I've got work to do.
this note would hit harder in all caps
Well, I never thought a chain split could happen with this UASF, but now that I sense your fear, I really hope it does.
Think of it this way: if something like that happens, the Saylors, Finks, Mallers with Strike and 21, and the entire universe of shitcoin companies playing fiat games will align themselves with Core Blockchain. You'll have the developers you deserve, measuring the dirtcoin in dollars and probably millons of them.
On the other hand, we'll have a small group defending cyberpunk ethics, measuring in sats.
I like the idea. Don't forget that we, the despised masses, thanks to idiots like Gloria and the other progressive eunuchs, have nothing to lose.
I think that concludes our little debate. Let the market decide.
Retards. Acting like feds split the discussion. They might have won if they didn’t go that route.
You are hearing?
I am seeing that a core supporter is claiming *it - “nostr divided bitcoin”
What does that say about your post and you accusing Knots supporters?
Thank god🤲🏼
That's the problem with Core worshipers, they think Core literally is Bitcoin.
Running knots+bip110
Bitcoin doesn't care about your thoughts. Vote by running the software that alines more with what Bitcoin is, money. I think CORE has done pretty poorly recently. So I am not trusting, I am verifying:
{
"version": 290200,
"subversion": "/Satoshi:29.2.0(bitcoin.badger)/Knots:20251110/",
"protocolversion": 70016,
"localservices": "0000000000000c09",
"localservicesnames": [
"NETWORK",
"WITNESS",
"NETWORK_LIMITED",
"P2P_V2"
],
I do agree more with BIP110 than I disagree, so I vote with my nodes.
It actually does but the percentage of the network running it should be strong majority.
In any case Bitcoin Knots keeps MY mempool free of spam and if I mine a block with MY BitAxe it will be free of spam.
BIP110 on the other hand reduces the ability to abuse Bitcoin with spam on consensus level.
Bitcoin without Nostr is opting out of half the revolution.
😂 so called spam is already stored on knots because knots is core with restrictive relay policy, which is proven to be bypassed and your bitaxe pointed at someone else’s stratum server will do what that pool operator dictates and how they construct block templates.
If you point your bitaxe at your own node+stratum server then why would you reject fees and get rewarded less by filtering what you call spam and even if you do get lucky some other miner will put so called spam right after your unspamed free block and you didn’t solve anything.
I mine solo with DATUM, Bitcoin Knots + BIP110 and my BitAxe.
Bitcoin is Freedom Money. NOT ARNITRARY DATABASE.
Also spam fees are negligible. Spam is disgusting too. Educate yourself.
BitcoinIsFuture
Running BIP110 on Bitcoin Knots because Bitcoin is Freedom Money 🤙
https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/2017#pullrequestreview-3384767316
"I'm generally supportive of the changes in this BIP. Aside from minor nitpicks in language, the 34 byte scriptPubKey restriction I think will prove to be quite valuable in addressing the larger concern of DoS blocks / poison blocks that impose such high computational costs on nodes that a single block would take 30 minutes to verify on decent hardware instead of taking about a second. This is an even larger threat to Bitcoin than either CSAM or quantum, because I've read that CSAM has already been present on Bitcoin for a very long time, and quantum computers aren't anywhere near good enough to be a threat, and may never be, whereas DoS blocks could be introduced by miners who take direct submissions without sufficient checks at any time.
It's been pointed out that disabling OP_SUCCESS in Tapscript would conflict with adding new signature verification opcodes in future BIPs that might use them to add quantum resistance, but I would point out that the semantics around existing opcodes could simply be altered to preserve compatibility with BIP 110. For example, instead of creating new sets of OP_CHECKSIG opcodes to support new signature schemes, the semantics of existing OP_CHECKSIG opcode could simply be adjusted to accept imperatively inputs of varying lengths, a form of overloading / polymorphism / or duck typing. While it could be argued that a more declarative approach is superior in cryptographic contexts, I don't weight that concern as heavily as the larger concern over DoS blocks, and as such, I'm supportive of this approach.
My only major objection is that this is temporary. I'm not very comfortable with either temporary soft forks or default node expiry because it forces users to act instead of delaying action, which I think delaying action is perfectly fine and reasonable as the protocol matures. It also reminds me too much of the "difficulty bomb" based monetary policy used to coerce Ethereum miners to adopt new code from the Ethereum foundation or else. That said, if BIP 110 were activated as is, I would still be supportive, and I would also support reactivating it in the future as a more permanent feature of Bitcoin.
At a high level, this proposal reminds me in spirit of early versions of my original P2QRH proposal. I just think it could use a little more polish, but I see it as being directionally correct."
Is that you on Twitter or a fake? @ODELLXYZ
Who are knots influencers?
Simpfluencers (influencers in your language) only exist for shitcoin core.
Knots has only plebs army not simpfluencers.
And I am not aware of plebs accusing the entire bitcoin technical community of being pedos EXCEPT ADAM BALLSACK.
You will never stop being core apologist that's why you will never find out which side has more cognitive dissonance.
You don't have balls to end the shitcoin core but 80IQ plebs do
We are running Knots + BIP110 and we will end the shitcoin core.
GFY 😎😎😎
I have never heard that once, the biggest knots supporters are on nostr so that makes no sense.
I think you might be getting bad information.
Your second statement doesn't make sense either. Knots is part of the Bitcoin technical community.
People like Nick Szabo and Luke are trying to avoid and or be proactive in preventing pedos from using it. You should try having a conversation with them instead of listening to the gossip. Unity is required when we need Bitcoin more than ever.
Why do some people crush on him so much? Dude seems pretty based for the position he is in.
Could it be…
He was working work the government to censor user on Twitter…
He’s constantly using black rock money in his businesses to promote and push kyc in his companies btc offerings…
He’s actively trying to change sats to bits…
He’s actively producing asics and runs a mining pool that’s employing the knots team who is actively promoting division between the community and trying to implement chain forks with their implementation of the protocol…
Are you really this retarded or is this a joke?
Thankfully, no one can "prevent" anyone from using Bitcoin. Unfortunately that includes pedos. If you could prevent people from using Bitcoin then it would not be good money or a useful tool for freedom.
Maybe I am retarded but nothing is worse than Bugle News
You don’t seem qualified to make that assessment
When it's used as transactions, yes. Not when I'm forced to store files on my node.
Do I need to be coretard to say " NOTHING IS WORSE THAN BUGLE NEWS"?
You can't be a Core supporter without blocking everyone else. Core Devs do it, so the worshippers need to as well
What?
When 1 click-install app?
We too.
And we are NOSTR only
If you really think Bitcoin is the best money then you will run Knots with BIP-110. Nostr does data storage while Bitcoin does money.
> Thankfully, no one can "prevent" anyone from using Bitcoin.
“Using” implies transacting value.
Involuntary data storage on nodes implies “abusing” the network. Thankfully there are some things we can do to prevent abuse.
Bugle News is slop.
Go back to your trough pleb
GASLIGHTING 101
1. Turns out it’s the core apologists that claim Nostr divided Bitcoin
2. Turns out a lot of the Bitcoin technical community was in the Epstein files and it’s pedo-adjacent. The Knots ones were not.
Fuck Odell. He’s a dishonest salty loser and nothing he says can be trusted.
View quoted note →His brother is shilling feudalism? 😂 dafuq
Yeah and the one guy is a core simp
The person who claims this is literally a core apologist like yourself.
It’s been all action on the Knots side.
1. Knots contributors built resources and a website to educate plebs about spam and its impact.
2. They helped Luke push Knots across major platforms and services like Start9, Umbrel, MyNode, and Parmanode.
3. Ocean is the only mining pool actively doing something meaningful for mining decentralisation.
4. The Knots side actually produced a BIP aimed at addressing the mess created by Core policy decisions and unwillingness to fix bugs.
So what have you and your crowd contributed to improving Bitcoin over the last three years, besides gaslighting the node community, insulting them as idiots, and pretending they’re too non-technical to have a say? If you think throwing money at the bad actors is action, I have a shitcoin to sell you.
You’re the larps my dude.
very disappointed to hear such a shit take, stop criticizing knots with fake information, I'm hearing that someone is claiming because there friends cousin told me
You don’t seem qualified to tell me what to do
17 years deep and anyone can slip a transaction in on-chain for 0.6 sat/vB!?
What spam? No fucker even uses Bitcoin.
And no one is using liquid / lightning either!
The pet rock is growing moss!
1 sat is a fair fee
low fee = low btc price
Low fee = No one using the pet rock 🪨 aka BTC
no signal in your message. i hope this is rather your noise, and not aiming to discourage "don't trust but verify".
Олигофрените ги мютвам.
wrong
no use = empty blocks
Odell following Adam Back's path of greed
Insufferable Walker... Your ego has gotten the better of you.
Plenty of them over the last few hours…
A bit tongue in cheek, last interview I saw Marty do with Whitney Webb he said something about maybe we just need some system similar to feudalism lol
Whitney was like Reeeaaally Marty lol
So Marty Bent is ODELL’s brother? Didn’t know. I stopped following him after my noob phase when I started suspecting he was either a shill or glowing a little. Checks out. 😂
I kept following ODELL for a while, but dropped off once he started pushing those Knots and spam takes. At that point it just felt like no serious person would choose that hill to die on unless they were incentivized, clueless, or personally invested. Since then his takes have gone downhill, with no real sign of re-evaluation or course correction.
If Im wrong about that, then I feel retarded. I remember hearing it and being surprised, but maybe it wasnt literally 😅
Neaner Neaner
😂🤣
thousands txs !
empty block = no tx
View quoted note →
