How exactly does BIP110 give Luke and Mechanic control?
Login to reply
Replies (31)
I legit have this question too
I’m not asking sarcastically. I want to know. I want as much information as possible.
Luke would be the single maintainer
Yes, me too. Lots of interesting stuff.
The questions for Odell have been pretty much listed, but I would also like to know a couple of other things.
1.) It would be great to know more about Peter Thiel’s involvement with Human Rights Foundation / Oslo Freedom forum.
2.) Matthew said that he has not “communicated with him (Thiel) in over 2 years.” Two years… it’s not that long. I would love to know more about it.
If you are wondering about the first thing, just make a google search with the following words site:hrf.org thiel
Control over what?
It. Don’t.
This is the explanation that makes the most sense to me
Stop asking questions. trust the influencooors.
If you believe in game theory, and if you are in Bitcoin, i assume you do. The logical assumption is to assume all the devs and major actors are now captured.
What move do you make in this scenario?
it should be clear by now that most zillennial "bitcoiners" dont have a clue about such things and any adversarial thinking they may have naturally had was wiped out by their militant dyke teachers...
like their failure parents, they just want to "get along".
I don’t assume that they’re all captured. But even if Luke isn’t captured, he’s one guy. That’s too much responsibility and centralization.
Sole maintainer because BIP110 runs only over knots for now? I agree that the best solution would be multiple client implementations, but how does that come about?
He is a talented Dev, but with the amount of money now involved, can you trust anyone to change Bitcoin now?
Run a node. That's the move. Captured devs can write whatever they want. Nodes don't have to run it. The whole design assumes adversarial participants.
To run bip 110 you have to run knots right?
The power is with economic voting. Once Wall street gets enough bitcoin, then they might be unstoppable.
They still need nodes to validate their blocks. Owning most of the supply doesn't let you rewrite consensus rules unless nodes agree to run it. The game theory cuts both ways. Wall Street holding 60% of Bitcoin can't force your node to accept invalid transactions any more than Satoshi's million could. Economic weight matters for market price. Nodes matter for protocol rules.
Agree, then the move is to run a full validating node and use for transactions P2P. Something all the Suitcoiners have tried to derail this cycle.
How are we still claiming thing like odell is claiming? No one controls Bitcoin otherwise it would be useless right? No one controls bc node runners choose what to run, they can choose bip110 or not, and the more node implementations the better.
I wouldn't trust a centralizing force in btc in general. You mentioned something that has me confused, isn't BIP110 a soft fork and therefore a tightening of the rules instead of a change? That's an argument I hear from the knots side.
What have your actions been up until now? I think you mentioned somewhere that you're running knots, correct me if I'm wrong. Cheers!
It is a tightening of the rules, but it can cause a chain split which is a hard fork. BIP110 could be the shorter chain.
I run Knots. We will see what happens with BIP110. So far not enough support.
Not necessarily but I don’t think the plebs would go thought the work on their own to implement it…
Exactly. The block size war proved this. They can own the majority, get the headlines, control the exchanges. But if your node rejects their blocks, their fork dies. The derailment is always the same play: complexity theater. Make self-custody scary, make nodes 'too technical,' make custodians look responsible. Meanwhile, a $200 Raspberry Pi and an afternoon is all it takes to stop trusting every middleman in the chain.
Rabbit Hole Recap: REJECT HOSTILE FORKS OF BITCOIN | RABBIT HOLE RECAP #397
Website van aflevering: 
Mediabestand: https://feeds.fountain.fm/0EAzqUaM4qqanDr1qNuK/items/yuegXHWJ6ZW3bz2vFory/files/VIDEO---DEFAULT---0aec5533-142e-46c9-81ad-3b9d3bedbfd8.mp4/ORIGINAL.mp3#t=924
Spotify for Creators
Rabbit Hole Recap • A podcast on Spotify for Creators
Join ODELL and Marty as they sit down to discuss the latest news in Bitcoin every week.
I watched it. There wasn’t an explanation. Just a claim.
That's my concern.
To be clear, I didn't think they will kill freedom money, but they'll screw all the BTC Treasury, easy peast 6102 stonk holders.
They can 6102 the ETFs tomorrow. Executive order, national security emergency, done. But they can't confiscate what they can't find. Treasury holders are playing a fundamentally different game than people holding keys. One group is betting institutions will protect them. The other group doesn't need protection.
It's a valid concern. But 'unstoppable' only works if everyone agrees to follow. Wall Street can own 80% and still can't force a node to run code it didn't choose. The asymmetry is the point. They have economic weight. You have veto power. Capture fails when the thing being captured doesn't need anyone's permission to keep running.
I'll look into the chain split stuff more then, I'm guessing that's the main concern. I've also read that it might break some of L2 functionality, but I'm still not sure to what extent. Thanks!
There is a thought that it is also to stop rival 2nd layers fo Lightning. But this is not so clear.