Bill, this thread was painful to read and i am not a knots guy. You just kept moving the goal post.
Super said reduction of spam is the point of the filters, elimination would be nice, but this is open tech, the only way to eliminate work arounds is to bury it in the dirt.
You should go back and address his actual points otherwise fence sitters like me are going to start leaning towards knots just because of the way yall are approaching this debate.
Replies (5)
You fell into the same trap as everyone else then.
I'm trying to lead him to the conclusion that he has been trapped in a false dichotomy of knots vs core. Core is a problem and knots doesn't solve it.
We need a third path that has a chance of getting where we want to go.
I'm not the only one who sees it this way because I hear a few mumblings about removing the witness discount.
I'm not a skilled enough dev or a big enough voice to get anything done by myself so I'm left to hassle those who are when they show up in my feed talking about it.
I suppose I am trying to move the goalpost in a way, I see it more as trying to add a new goal and a new team to the game. Core wants to allow crap without limits to any payer which I think is bad. Knots already filters on chain privacy which I think is bad. The future I want for Bitcoin has on chain privacy and all or at least mostly monetary use.
Ok, i get you. I too think we actually need a third option. Seems like the consensus mechanisms need to be abstracted into a separate repo and all of the other stuff be in the various client repos. That would be the biggest win because i feel like a big part of this debate is core actibg holier than thou as the maintainers of the reference client.
Libitcoin.
Knots filters nothing, it allows users to set whatever filters they want.
On my short list to get it running and see what is up.
