Core's arrogance and recklessness in uncapping OP_RETURN in the face of broad and real controversy is imo where the ego is found. It predictably created the current situation.
I get zero impression that Luke and Mechanic are driven by pure ego and desire for control/power, rather that they're trying to protect Bitcoin from eroding away from its core mission of being money separate from the state.
Replies (27)
What's the problem with uncapping OP_RETURN? It does not change anything related to what's valid tx and what is not, it does not change block size, and you still have to pay for the block space 🤔
bordalix
No it is not, consensus rules can only be changed via a fork: a soft fork if you tighten the rules, and a hard fork if you loosen them.
Relay rules can be equal or tighter than consensus rules, but never looser.
The consensus rule for OP_RETURN size is that there's no limit. What Core is trying to do is make relay rules equal to the consensus rules (instead of tighter)
Why is this important?
When you have tighter relay rules, you create incentives for miners and pools to create an API where one can broadcast non standard transactions (which already happened) which increases the risk of mining centralization.
If I want to broadcast a non standard transaction, I just need to contact a handful of these APIs and send my transaction.
This makes a handful of big hashing power players to have a different mempool from the rest of the miners, a form of centralization, which creates opportunities for MEV and censorship.
And if you have censorship, it's not Bitcoin anymore.
So, you're worried with what people can put on the machine, while Core is worried with keeping the machine running.
Sorry to say, but in this specific case, Core worries are more important than yours: it doesn't matter what people put in the machine if the machine is not working.
View quoted note →
The day Bitcoin Core developers bend to the pressure of a misguided Twitter mob riled up by populist social media influencers, instead of merging code based on their best technical judgement, is the day the codebase should be forked to re-establish sound engineering practices.
The ego trip is on both sides
Main character syndrome
Do you see we say Mechanic and Luke in one side and we say Core on the other?
Bitcoin Core maintains its reputation by making difficult technical decisions despite upsetting ignorant folks.
The neat thing is, if your feelings are hurt you can always write your own code. Or you can run code from a monarchist sedevacantist who thinks heretics should be murdered by the State and claims nobody could create a better self custody setup than his hot wallet that lost him his life savings.
Freedom is great!
Cypherpunk Cogitations
It's Knot a Serious Project
A comprehensive compilation of controversial actions and statements by Luke Dashjr.
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.
Odell should watch your discussion with
@knutsvanholm. Can learn a lot from you and the way how to discuss things in honest objective manner and without personal attacks.
I also get no sense of dishonesty from either of them. When i hear Lopp, shinobi etc or pretty much any Core supporter, the arguments don’t ever fit.
I hope its just greed motivating them but Im worried it’s that they are co-opted like Adam. It’s the only thing that fits.
Im definitely worried about bitcoin.
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
I don't know what to make of any of this except that the Core update seems to have made very little sense
As someone without the technical background to understand, I find it all pretty upsetting. Although I don't (yet) have enough bitcoin for this to be a major issue for me, so much of my hope for a better future is based on my belief in this protocol.
I 100% agree.
The snarkiness and condescension on the core side has been next level.
I’m not fully decided but Luke is too autistic to be anything other than genuinely expressing what he thinks is the right path forward.
If you need “big ego” arguments you don’t have a good argument.
Just don’t react to arrogance and recklessness with arrogance and recklessness.
View quoted note →I get exactly the opposite impression of Luke's and Mechanic's motivations...
It is going to work out.
I doubt he is interested in that. He seems to be coping against this point. Very emotional.
You can always fork like this, but be prepared for the "industry" to seriously & permanently tarnish you in the process.
Too many core folks are providing ad hominims without substantive arguments. Knots folks make unaknowledged arguments & then resort to ad hominims. Who are uninformed folks more likely to trust, while both sides are intent on bastardizing the debate?
GM PV GFY
they're all full of shit afaict
the spam isn't even in op_return
But but but they didn't "read the room"!!!!!
Look at Dan Held over there. He's on the same stupid side he's always been on. Doing stupid fucking Dan Held shit. Both Lopp and Odell now stand next to Dan. Crazy shit..
Luke calling everyone a liar isn't at all dishonest it's self or disingenuous.
Liar
They bent a little bit by not deprecating the datacarriersize setting
