- soft forks without consensus result in a chainsplit - bcash was a hard fork with minority support so it trended to zero - if your desire is to try to push through this soft fork with legal threats that is lame as fuck and will probably fail

It's connected to the screenshot because asserting the protocol is content agnostic is not supporting the dissemination child porn. Your authoritarian tendencies are showing.

Tell the truth faggot.

Sounds like C. W. all over again

Now way this is going to work

How much are your CIA handlers paying you? After you lost your btc must be the only way to support the family.

Dude, get off the internet. Go touch grass, spend time with your family. We don't need you to "save bitcoin".

Love how history has a sense of irony. For context, some of the people that accused Luke of “wanting to control Bitcoin” were in fact exchanging mails, ideas and funds with Epstein, not Luke. How that worked for Bitcoin is anyone’s guess, but the shift in priorities can’t be credibly denied. View quoted note →

Did you read any of this? Are you a bot or just retarded?

Can someone articulate a reasonable reason why this change in default relay policy was needed? Seriously. This is a change with serious potential risk and consequences. Why the fuck was it needed? Can someone say something more convincing than “fee predictor” or “because we want JPEGs on chain” or “content agnostic” The use case is money. Why the fuck do we need this change in standard relay policy??