Bitcoin Knots is the fork of the compromised Core devs and Bitcoin being decentralized shows that Core is irrelevant. Bitcoin Plebs can run what they choose it best represents Bitcoin. The Bitcoin immune system is working.

Fork Around & Find Out

i guess its good that it exposes that Bitcoin governance is de facto "social pressure on Core" which is indeed a fucking stupid way to run an important software project but its probably better than "Core just decides themselves without any social input at all"

This was always going to be governed "socially". The only other alternatives are centralized "Foundation"-type governance structures... Bitcoin is (ironically) the most perfect system of anarcho-capitalist ownership ever invemted, but Bitcoin itself is "owned" by no one.

How could this ever work? Who would be the devs in the new fork? Who would trust those devs?

no. it's not. like at at all. It is a large software project which is controlled by a core group of developers. mostly nothing happens because they're incentivized to do nothing. except when they're incentivized to do something. Don't kid yourself that it's decentralized.

Yes the location of the code is irrelevant

ah, sound engineering like core bend to shitrea 🤷🏻‍♂️ 🪢🛡️⚒️🌊

Devs who know somethimg about money please, not the kind of faggots that run core.

How is capping arbitrary data a “technical argument” that can be judged by “technical judgement” rather than a philosophical position on what bitcoin is and what it should optimise for? Deciding about this is much more about “should we take the risk of jeopardizing Bitcoin as money for its potential use as data storage” than anything technical.

Technical judgement is how you determine the best way to achieve a goal. It does not tell you what goals should be pursued. The claim that technical judgement is all that matters is why core devs are perceived as arrogant.

We use to call that consensus. Now you’re telling people to trust the so called experts. It’s not just about the code. Anyone one these guys could have coded bitcoin. But they didn’t because it’s more than just code.

I’m not sure “merging code based on their best technical judgement” can be taken for granted when there are definitely financial interests involved. The current funding and some pasts of the devs, means that they like us, cannot be absolutely neutral. No man is above his incentives. Assuming people that wield so much power/influence would be able to remain neutral to simple technical judgement, when there are internal and external forces to consider may be misguided.

I co-sign this. Core devs can’t get captured by politics, the thirst for power, the pursuit of corporate aims or personal fame (did we ever know a name of a core dev before? Of they are known they can be captured). Adding a feature to help a company’s business without broad consensus (op_return increase) is a line Bitcoincore has crossed. Unfortunately what was the alternative is playing similar games with bip115. This is a voluntary participation system, no coercion, no threats. No.1 reduce risks and bugs No.2 support improvements in functionality with breaching No.1 Default in no change, aim is variation reduction, not the introduction of potential unintended consequences Gm freaks, happy Sunday. View quoted note →

But but but they didn't "read the room"!!!!!

They bent a little bit by not deprecating the datacarriersize setting