i do not think “the majority of core devs are compromised” i do not think its possible to stop inscriptions even though i wish they were not possible i do not think it is safe to have the majority of the network run software that is maintained by a single individual i do think node operators should have more choice and the best path forward is fostering well reviewed alternatives to core

What evidence do we actually have that Core has multiple devs? I mean, it could be like the mining situation - many names, sharing one template. The devs are many names, but one groupthink? Or worse, how do we know its actually them pushing the code? Anyway. Personalities don't matter. There needs to open competition between different implementations competing for maket share of the userbase. 21% of the network migrated to knots within one (?) release cycle - despite the dev concentration risk. That tells you a lot. The plebs have signalled: competition has begun massively. Bullish af. I'd love to see eg 5 implementations with at least 10% share each. Each side is going to have to up their game to grow market share now. Complacency is gone.