The arguments for 110 are enough to stand on their own. I'll never understand why they dig these holes.

Flat earth would be the next step.

💯

It’s crazy. He sounds like a scammer or like he has a mental illness.

So you're with the spam csam scam chain that's proven to be controlled and centralized by about 5 mining pools... sad... you were one of my heroes... oh well... guess we'll both have to watch as the spam chain get's more centralized due to utxo set bloat eventually making it impossible for people like you and me to run nodes... not to mention contentious soft forks being pushed through by the centralized cabal of miners that have to bend the knee to the state...

@FreedomMoneyIsFuture you don’t actually agree with this do you?

I mean this is insane View quoted note →

What do you think of Core? Are you running Core v30+? Never mind, nodes don't matter when miners are centralized. View quoted note →

Good luck getting a clear answer. All they do is deflect, lie, twist words and definitions. Very manipulative. I just mute them when they reply with such nonsense.

It’s wild 😂 He’s gotta be intentionally scamming people or actually mentally ill.

We are all different people. Each one has their own set of reasons to do one thing or another. Luke sees the things in this way and expresses it. I think Bitcoin-Blake2b would be good for Bitcoin because if Core fucks up real bad, people will have an option. Bitcoin Knots have been less than 1% for more than a decade and during a critical moment became a needed alternative.

💯😂

Kinda hard to seperate money and state when the future of the network is decided by 5 mining pools that are subject to the state instead of 17,000 node runners who could care less about the state. Good luck preventing state level attacks at this point and ideas from guys like this.

But people like you need to call out Luke for what he’s doing. You could have agreed with knots, even the anti spam, even BIP 110 but this behavior now needs to be called out by former supporters for what it is. Luke has completely lost the plot and is going about this in the worst way possible. He’s even lying. It is a straight up lie and deception to say that the miners are attacking true bitcoin and acting like BIP 110 is the true chain is a flat out lie. You can’t stand behind someone who is acting like that can you?

I do stand behind BIP 110 idea first. Second try looking from Luke's perspective. Nodes / Node runners are the Bitcoin network, miners are suppliers of valid blocks for that network and nodes verify if blocks are valid. When BIP-110 activated, miners ignored it and their blocks are invalid, BIP-110 nodes reject them. So the BIP-110 network needs new miners. According to Luke that is the real Bitcoin network and I do think that BIP-110 was an improvement in terms of monetary properties and security. Those are the rules of decentralized network. In a centralized network, nodes don't matter and no one needs to run a node. Its all up to the miners.

Shitcoin chain poetry slam

Okay now this is getting ridiculous. Is he trolling or gaslighting or both? What I don’t understand is that if BIP110 was going to be only for a year anyway, why not just spend time looking for another solution and gathering real support for it? View quoted note →

That is a lie. There were 0 URSF because when miners are centralized that is not needed as nodes do not matter in a centralized system.

Then we agree its a good news that BIP-110 is going to hard fork.

Well, I do think that BIP-110 acted as a great and needed revelation of what the state of Bitcoin is.

It is an alternative. It will be small and tiny but an alternative. Every Bitcoiner hopes that Core do not completely fuck up but things are not looking good. Epstein. Centralized miners. Saylor and BlackRock fiat maxis. Tons of spammers and scammers

Who is funding & building spam on Bitcoin?

An opinion map of the VC money behind ordinals, runes, tokens and other non-monetary Bitcoin projects.

So Citrea and SLopp too.

Luke and BIP110ers deny reality. It's sad to see.

In a decentralized network where nodes matter you need to do it via URSF. In a centralized network where nodes do not matter, miner can just ignore it. 5 big miners make more than 90% if the hash rate and they were all in agreement about the BIP which would be strange for decentralized network but not strange for centralized one.

Apparently he has lost his mind.

Ursula von der Leyen likes that communist shit.

Everyone should run their node however they want to. But when there is a change in a decentralized network a participant can ignore a change, actively enforce a change or actively reject a change. If the change is a soft fork, those who ignore it actually accept the change. We speak about the nodes here.

Illuminati 😂

Is your point that Bitcoin is decentralized? And that in this case the consensus decided to ignore BIP-110?

Ocean mining both chains proved its a good design offering sovereignty to miners and providing decentralization. The rest of the miners were lobbied into submission. That is why all of them acted in the same way. In a centralized mining network, node do not matter.

20% of the network is not tiny but it is what it is. The end result is that Bitcoin community is fine with big OP_RETURNs, spam, ordinals, jpegs and even csam on the blockchain in unobfuscated form. More inscriptions too, more exploiting Taproot. More shitcoins on top of Bitcoin, like the one Citrea launched. So we will see where this leads. I know for me that it will be good to have a decent alternative with strong monetary DNA.

the miners have too much control because their defection would be deadly to the chain's cadence. they are easiest to bribe and the protocol is riddled with deliberate vulnerabilities that favor the shitcoinery use case that got slipped in and normalised. witness discount, taproot no witness push limit. and from the beginning, the difficulty adjustment was excessively simple and can't recover from a big hashpower change (the risk of miner defection) and this also means that miners are incentivised to parasite and destroy other sha256 mined chains, which also have weak difficulty adjustments, and the checkpoints that stop private sidechain attacks, which are also not economic with too many deterrents to defection, but a minority fork will fall to this easily, and parasiting competitors is in the interests of the miners. so if you followed all that, the miners are in control, and the attackers know this which is why they were all going to win big if they didn't switch to bip-110. if it failed, they wouldn't lose revenue. mining is a cutthroat business, and also favors the bigger players by its burgeoning scale. the only path out of this mess is giving miners a chain to mine on that has equal income prospects and zero chance of being killed by the miners. and all the protocol holes fixed, all deficiencies compensated properly.