this seems fucked up?
Login to reply
Replies (116)
I wonder who wrote that
1) what
AI prolly
pretty coercive...
AI got brain π€£
I think it's part of the long debate in here:
Ok so apparently rolling back the chain in case of a CSAM OP_RETURN is also proposed as an activation mechanism for this βanti-spamβ soft fork drafted by @npub1lh27...a9nk @npub1lh27...a9nk.
Also, even if no such OP_RETURN is mined, they want to activate this as a UASF within ~three(!) months.
https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/2017/commits/3c718237072c107ced8c3531a487354fbdae55df
View quoted note →
if logic fails then dragging people into fear and morality is like exactly what politicians do.
stay away from them as far as possible.
Run Knots or suffer "moral consequences"? π΅βπ«
Gotta love when devs talk legal.
isnt this just Lukes authoritarism?
its not based in reality afaict
Not to mention it literally creates an attack vector for double spending, making it possible for anyone to trigger an arbitrarily long chain reorganization.
They have really worked themselves into a fever
Sanatory level shit
Like nvk says. bitcoin is anarchy some people canβt handle it
Knots crew has lost the plot. They should just fork all the way off.
Looks like something core would write lol
someone clear something up for me... aside from whatever is inserted, shouldn't we be against bloat? how big is too big?
π
Lots of disingenuous core proponents phrasing this as a sort of threat.
Their opinion is that running Core may soon have some pretty important legal implications that some may not be interested in.
Perfectly rational disclaimer if youre of that opinion. Bad decision though imo
CSAM is a serious issue and it took down BSV quite effectively.
Core V30 is BSVing Bitcoin.
Admittedly, the best way to handle this is to target the word "images" or "non financial data" to include messages.
The concept of this effort is fucked up. If you can change bitcoin and reorganize to remove content you can change bitcoin and make it impossible to use without KYC. This whole thing is an insane suggestion,
It's his god complex and delusions around CSAM
I have a vagina and Iβm scared. Sike!
CSAM is not a serious issue. It's a slippery slope exaggeration born from Luke's delusional imagination.
If you weren't CORECUCK then you would have got the context behind this sentence but anyways thanks for showing your true color.
This is exactly what a lot of bitcoiners were expecting from you.
Since Nostr is still a circlejerk of few Bitcoin simpfluencers, you will unlikely to get deserved heat for this but at some point, plebs will realize who you have been siding with in this war
Luke is technically a core dev. He even contributed to core 30.
kind of an evergreen statement. rejecting or accepting code being executed on hardware you own and run *may* subject you to legal or moral consequences always and everywhere.
Its over the top maybe, but could be technically correct. Better to err on the side of caution.
I want Bitcoin to end central banking. I'm less certain that's going to occur if Bitcoin is a jack of all trades.
Put simply, all this other shit muddies the water
That you, Vitalik?
The first word of your bio is certainly accurate π
liar
Yeah? Nahhhhh. Yeaaah.
Dude you are just influencer and VC.
And I am ok with you being Luke 2.0 as long as you have BALLS to call out shitcoin core and core devs.
What's the context here @grok
The full text for context.
Attorney quotes:
In BSV authorities were involved in the csam incident.
Attorney quotes:
In BSV authorities were involved in the csam incident.
Its core Devs pushing this fork
Blackrock are behind the core 30 release.
Look it up.
They have been throwing shitloads of money at core devs to influence this.
The point is to centralise the blockchain, make it unaffordable for regular people to run nodes, so that Blackrock and financial institutions can take control of Bitcoin.
Core Devs are compromised selling their souls for fiat.
Says the guy who wants to host childporn on chain
Have link? I'm too lazy to look it up but want to read about this...TIA!
Spoken like a true British
Closest nostr ever gets to X is reading the comments on an Odell post regarding a BTC node implementation
Yes, running a node with large data carrying will almost certainly mean you're hosting illegal content. Doing this comes with real life consequences. I don't make the rules.
Youβre a joo, of course you support CSAM.
Weβre trying! @Matthew Kratter
This is just spin
Lots of disingenuous core proponents phrasing this as a sort of threat.
Their opinion is that running Core may soon have some pretty important legal implications that some may not be interested in.
Perfectly rational disclaimer if youre of that opinion. Bad decision though imo
View quoted note →
Bang, Bang.
No question mark required. You can just say things.
Core v30 brings BS we need UASF for sure. Bitcoin is money.
It makes sense to me
Starting to find it hard to support Luke 100% at this point.
I'm ready for both. Bring it.
Seems like the powers that be are going to go after people for using bitcoinβ¦.this is like the βwe warned youβ phase and good for narrative building in the court of public opinionβ¦I maintain we still havenβt truly seen the βthen they fight you stageβ
There is only one correct response
My bullshit meter π§ just exploded after reading this note. Hyperbole / 10 π
It's either a slippery slope or there's no chance it's going to be an issue.
It may be worded poorly, but if you read it in context, you know exactly what it means.
If you do illegal things, will have to face the consequences of doing or allowing those illegal things. It's not a threat, it's a warning.
Like, "don't climb over that fence, or bad things will happen". When the dog attacks you, don't come back crying about how you didn't realise.
How do you feel about Tor and Tor nodes?
π―
Confess.
He has always been doing things like this. What do you think is new?
That they aren't money and are literally meant for data transference.
Would you personally run a Tor node?
No. I would run an I2P node.
Itβs escalating though. The debate at Lugano was ridiculous. He shouted βCPβ and βBad actorβ in between some debate.
This is in no way the way to get others on board. If anything it pushes them in the other direction. Itβs a spook tactic.
I agree that this would be a valid spook tactic.
Itβs being used against us in Australia right now with age verification laws.
Wall street is taking supply out of circulation and people call it mass-adoption
Core turns the electronic cash system into a digital photo album.
One hell of an epoch so far
Welcome to choosing between crazy and stupid.
No. Just a true statement.
Because it is, extremely. Knotzis are worst than bcashers at this point.
Legend
Running a node behind TOR or I2P only maybe solves one problem here, which is the node runner getting arrested for CP possession or such.
It can't save the Bitcoin projects reputation, or protect Bitcoin's market value in such an environment. Its still a disaster.
Nah, it's legit.
Worse cos we fight to keep Bitcoin staying as money? Bcashers ain't got nothing on uz!
Bro doesn't like the truth.
Worse because you can't fucking spell
Acting glowie AF
Finally, Knots supporters showing their true intentions
View quoted note β
If this suggestion made from @Bitcoin Mechanic gets implemented in the BIP then I don't know if @ODELL will have anything left to FUD about BIP 444.
Let's see what else he comes up with to FUD about BIP 444. I can't wait for the next FUD
Regardless the outcome of BIP 444, plebs can now realize that he is TRULY CORECUCK (& COWARD TOO FOR NOT RAISING THE CONCERNS AGINNST TYRANNY OF SHITCOIN CORE DEVS)
#BIP444
View quoted note β
A lot of things are fucked up. One liners without context are fucked up. Removing a moat that somewhat prevents shit on the network of humanityβs first shot at true money, is fucked upβ¦. In my opinion.
The body is dead, bloated and stinking. Search and rescue has yet to locate it, but you can smell it. Once itβs located, people will be held to account. Interesting times.
View quoted note β
is it not true?
Why? They are describing why they think the soft fork is needed.
A description is not a threat.
Maybe it could be worded better, but I think a lot of outrage over this one line is from people taking it out of context and looking for something to dunk on.
that gets an F
Why don't we just quickly soft fork to disallow large OP_RETURN outputs (i.e. keep them capped to 80 bytes) only, with forward-looking activation (no retroactive block invalidation)? This would give the market a clear and simple way to decide whether such transactions are acceptable or not. It wouldn't have any of the issues mentioned so far in the discussion like creating an incentive to put CSAM or other illegal content to attempt a reorg double spend due to the complex deployment mechanism proposed in BIP-444 or like putting in jeopardy existing Taproot functionality by touching other primitives. We don't actually need to remove all the mechanisms that can be used for embedding data (which has been demonstrated to be impossible). Rather what we need is to give users the opportunity to signal whether arbitrary data is welcome or not.
If the legal concerns are compelling enough to warrant consensus changes, miners should support a clean soft fork immediately. If the market quickly adopts the new consensus-level OP_RETURN restrictions it would announce sufficiently clearly to the world that arbitrary data is not welcome and deter future attempts to bring that to Bitcoin by showing the network's readiness to resist such efforts. I believe that this PR is too dramatic and needlessly complicated for what we need: letting the market decide whether to accept or reject the explicit invitation for arbitrary data storage that Core v30 has created. Technical changes should be limited to this question only and simple enough for people to make a decision without being distracted or overwhelmed by adjacent issues.
yeah core fucked it up
and you call yourself a bitcoiner
I swear to GOD I know of any of those shitcoiners are coming to Tokyo I will kick their ass so hard here that they will never visit again, in Japan is just your fist or knife, not the US I will fuck this Lopp mother fucker and his shitcoiner buddies too. I am not loosing my life savings because of the greed of some shitcoiners trying to fuck with Bitcoin. and I am ready everyday ready.
You seem fucked up.
At what point you idiots will call out this clown for his clownery?
View quoted note β
View quoted note β
Nnnnnnnooooooooooooooooooooooo!
He should have wrote "a lightning strike".
Missed oppurtunities.
and your alternative is ? to keep the first attack vector as is ?
Got a source for that? That would indicate the only reason they haven't done it to Bitcoin yet is building this narrative / waiting for more Core 30 adoption...
Assuming good faith, Odell, you seem to have this habit of posting before verifying...
he is a liar for calling me a corecuck
which he knows isnt true
Screenshots are all from here
About BSV from here
https://news.sophos.com/en-us/2019/02/08/child-abuse-imagery-found-in-cryptocurrency-blockchain/
"After being told of the content by local authorities, BitcoinFiles.org removed it from its websites and gave Money Button the bad news that its service had been used as a conduit. Said Money Button:
We have confirmed that was the case and we have banned the user responsible for creating those transactions.
Money Buttonβs statement makes no mention of the type of illegal content, but the BBC confirmed that child abuse images were involved after talking to Money Button founder, Ryan Charles.
Why has this happened now?
The short answer is: because it can β the ability of BSV to store data recently expanded.
Money Button provides this service completely for free, and the only fees paid are to miners, which at present market prices are only about 7 US cents per 100 KB."
GitHub
BIP 110: Reduced Data Temporary Softfork by dathonohm Β· Pull Request #2017 Β· bitcoin/bips
Mailing list thread at https://groups.google.com/g/bitcoindev/c/nOZim6FbuF8
Editor note: please post conceptual feedback and meta-commentary on th...
The only way to assure #Bitcoinβs immutability is to freeze the code. Bitcoin ultimately solves for scarcity and immutability. It can not guarantee immutability when people constantly change the code. And the code has been fine for a long time. No changes required. Any change needs to be considered an attack or Bitcoin will not survive.
But are his pants on fire? Thatβs the real question.
Seeing Core V30 percentage of the nodes I don't think they are able to propagate spam.
I hope you and the team can create the soft fork code without rush.
It needs to be well tested and very good quality to achieve the goal to protect Bitcoin from the spam.
Guess I replied to the wrong post...I meant the top one
Idk man Iβm just running 29.2 until any other path makes sense at this point π€·ββοΈ
Could always use more hands on deck
No a lot of bitcoiners (including myself) have realized that in past few months that you are CORECUCK hence I started calling out and surprisingly some people (on Nostr) seem to agree with the statement.
Why don't you just start calling out shitcoin core and shitcoin core devs instead of arguing with me? That would be helpful to you (& bitcoin as well)
And never try to compare funding to shitcoin core with other projects you or Ten31 or OpenSats funded.
You can't compare anything else to shitcoin core because pretty much everything you funded is downstream of shitcoin core so, funding shitcoin core and shitcoin core devs damage more than anything else at this point.
I just hope shitcoin core gets obliterated in the future so, I don't need to tell you CORECUCK anymore.
I am up for testing. And we probably can find more volunteers on Nostr to test.
It looks like a statement of fact.
π―