Replies (127)
Does this motivate you to peer review knots?
No, I have zero interest to be associated with Knots in any way.
Do you contribute to Bitcoin core?
I do. What's up with the leading questions? Are you working up to my code being released in Knots? I'm well aware of that, and that's an obvious possibility from most of my work being freely licensed.
Are these claims in the room with us right now?
Weird. Several core devs have said, and many supporters have echoed, that we should just run knots if we're not happy with the change. I guess they weren't being completely honest.
Wow. 40 contributors and not one will call out the BS happening at core.
I am just curious what your background is considering the OP, if you are actively contributing I put more weight into what I read from you.
Not looking for some hostile back & forth about the current fiasco.
I like the idea of optionality for Bitcoiners regardless if it stays a niche project - which it should be for the time-being.
You disregard it for obvious reasons, but I think we should review it based on merit of code first & foremost.
Quote it or you just made this up
funny how you didn't name the guy who manages bitcoin knots
there's like peter wiule, and lukedash-jr, and then, idk who the rest of you are because i never hear about you
funny that
Obviously he is making a play on words since knots is a fork of core, which would have the developer total on knots = core dev team + Luke
Tell me more of your 180iq takes please
Very interesting. Thank you. So what is purpose of Bitcoin Knots
The other developers work on the upstream project, Bitcoin Core. It is not clear to me why you think he's joking. Irrational takes like this are par of the course for him.
The project was previously hosted on sourceforge. Besides this number only counts the people that have committed code, not all contributors.
Luke is a BIPs Editor and the BIPs repository is part of the Bitcoin organization.
I agree that the people who are interested in that project should probably do something to improve the review it gets.
Maybe it's because we're not at the center of drama every other week
What are you referring to?
I'm just pointing out some facts, you do you
The beauty of open source is you can verify
@Murch ‘s claims very easily.
Go have a look at the knots repo. And if you’re a tech person, look at the commits to see what
@Luke Dashjr and/or others have been contributing to Knots. (And while you’re at it, do the same on Core from time to time.)
Then decide which software suits YOU best.
There are no silver bullets though. It’s trade-offs all the way down. Adjust your risk level accordingly.
nevent1qqswaa5vpsyp29258n6radga5ey0q88apnyaa9uqst7fvzcuqjzeynqpr3mhxue69uhkummnw3ezucnfw33k76twv4ezuum0vd5kzmql09nc2
Spam Filters
and you think it's ok removing configuration controls for a spam related element of the core configuration?
you handed luke a win on this, idk what you guys think you are doing
there is two ways that controversy surrounds a person:
1. they are a drama queen
2. they really are being attacked and most of the devs are either in on it or going along with it
since it has involved his computer being hacked i question the likelihood of it being 1.
i'm also a black sheep in my dev community as well and i'm basically shadowbanned from visibility even though i have had many valid points of criticism of the establishment, so i'm inclined to believe that the core devs are a bunch of sheep who are letting the wolves run wild on the backs of the users
and i'm not gonna be gaslit about this, the history of covert attempts to subvert the security of bitcoin is extensive and if you don't think that matters you are a naive midwit
Would it not be more useful to start reviewing and contributing to knots then, instead of posting empty rhetoric to socials?
it's hilarious a crowd of people who are constantly in controversy pointing at one of them like he hasn't got a valid point, especially with people like Peter Tod on your team.
i do know how to write blockchain servers and this problem is obvious to anyone who can write even a little one method microservice
guess what, the users decided they don't like what your team did, so go suck it, instead of concern trolling
you were wrong, fuck off
That doesn't mean core is better than knots. Run Bitcoin knots. That's it
Are the filters a valid addition
I don't really know tbh
Ok… I’m a non techie but I run a node with a few Bitaxe Gammas pointing hash to Ocean and have loaded Bitcoin Knots. I’m into making a contribution to the decentralisation of mining and want to grow into solo mining. It all feels aligned to the original Bitcoin ethos and feels very much like the right thing to do
Same, I'd love to have plenty of Gammas pointed at Ocean
There is a known issue with Knots in that after 2 years it needs restarting otherwise your node won't follow the main chain. You of course need to know this if you're intending to make money off mining.
Knots is maintained by a single developer so please be wary of what's on your miners.
I'm on no side (Core vs Knots) but there is a healthy debate currently happening.
Thanks for the pointers. I’m in for some sats but the principal is the bigger issue for me.
Likewise I don’t have a side be it Core or Knots but I’ll do what I can towards decentralisation at every opportunity
It’s the thing Bro… jump in!
"Bitcoin Knots has more contributors than Bitcoin Core"
Since Knots is a fork of Core, this is just so by definition.
It looks to me as if you mean to imply someone claimed that Knots has more 'maintainers'; but realized that would have been too obvious of a strawman.
Again, would it not be more useful to start reviewing and contributing to knots then, instead of yelling at strangers on the internet?
Many people have claimed that though.
That looks beautiful! Is it noisy?
I got one Supra
Are you contributing for a monetary revolution or sth else? Where are strong characters who oppose the Todds and Lopps within Core?🤔
👀
Ta… it’s really quiet and there’s no meaningful heat issue.
Supra’s are good. We need more ppl like you building swarms of Bitaxe.
Liar
No, there isn't. Stop making things up if you're supposedly "on no side"
This particular issue has been discussed ad nauseam and yet there is so little trust in Bitcoin Core, Bitcoin Knots continues to be downloaded by the plebs.
The plebs need to step up and fund more Knots development. I believe
@OpenSats is already pushing this initiative.
It seems so even if that one person from knots is very competent we can't afford to trust a single individual (even if he is among the best and most competent that can be found around) 🤷♂️
I may have misunderstood the note I read
nostter
nostter
Nostr client for web.
I'm not attacking you or your project, you're an inspiration. I'm trying to share information, not increase animosity.
When Rome was an empire, the saying was qui bono? Who benefits?
Who benefits when spam is forced on the nodes by your altruistic devs? I’ll stick with the one developer whose interests align with Satoshi’s vision, a monetary network.
Thanks. I’m running knots.
All those Core maintainers. All those eyes. Yet it took someone outside the club to call out what was happening. Changes were being made without community input. People raising questions were being silenced or banned. They won’t censor spam, but they’ll censor dissent.
This isn’t about OP_RETURN. It’s about behavior. About acting like Core is Bitcoin, instead of Bitcoin being the people. One person can slip in changes while everyone else stays quiet, and we’re told to trust the process. That’s not decentralization. That’s capture with better PR.
Government has way more employees than any bitcoin project, so we should trust the US dollar over Bitcoin. 🤡
I would still rather trust this one person who appears to understand what bitcoin is for and what makes it unique, than a group who appears to have been compromised, either ideologically or financially, to introduce a change that is clearly against the long term interests of bitcoin.
👍🏻👍🏻
When I get a house sometime next year I'll have many of them running. I look so much forward to diving into it!
Agree, the Core repo appears to have 1k+ total contributors, versus Knots repo has a single member _ Luke.
Good call my friend
Imagine having _really_ strong opinions and judgments on what “core” is or isn’t doing while lacking the basic knowledge of who contributes to the core code, and what they actually do and don’t do.
Maybe less hero worship and more “don’t trust, verify” is needed.
Oh, my apologies, I didn't realize what the source of the second screenshot was. Thanks
Good points. Even if you agree with knots, a single developer pushing to master and issuing releases with no review is insane. I don’t want to completely trust one guy.
One-man forks in Bitcoin? Just crypto's version of a dictatorship. Stick with the community chaos. ⛏️
How much would you have to get paid to inspect knots code?
How much do you get paid to contribute to core?
Luke is technically part of the club, but yeah it's about behaviour for sure.
The Bitcoin software doesn’t auto-update. If Knots ever goes rogue, we’ll move on from that too. This isn’t about picking a winner. It’s about refusing to pretend we have real choice when that choice is being shaped behind closed doors.
Right now, there are more eyes on Knots than ever. Any funny business would be spotted. What’s concerning is that Core has started censoring people when conflicts of interest are pointed out. They say we have choice. But everything that has been said so far points to the illusion of it.
tl;dr
Bitcoin Knots code review be like:
No, people contributing to the upstream project are part of the process in the upstream project. Their review also benefits the downstream project as their code contributions are released with the downstairs project, but they are not participating in the downstream project's process.
Your restarting it like this makes me think that the distinction is not clearly understood.
*restating
Not related to the bullshit comment above , but maybe one the biggest questions knots ppl have is:
IF this change does bring the consequence of non-monetary tx pushing out monetary tx due to high fees and full blocks, is core going to “rewind” this change? Cause from some statements from core devs it seems that btc is a database for whatever the market wants it to be, and if the market wants it to be for non monetary tx then be it. I might be wrong but this seems to be the biggest concern from knots ppl, the fact that btc as PRIMARILY a monetary network is not a given
Cheers
The issue is who's inspecting the code to date?
It's not like knots is a brand new project with just one or two minor differences to core.
I've been playing with the idea of running knots for over a year now - I just wish there were more reviews of the code differences I could reference.
I would like to see core make steps towards helping hashers become miners again, constructing their own templates and running their own nodes.
Core should have mining features ready to go with 1 click for the pool hashers to switch to decentralized mining.
Bitcoin Audible • Read_881 - The Problem is Deeper Than Spam • Listen on Fountain
What if the real issue is actually much deeper than how to deal with spam? Everyone is arguing about mempool settings, who gets to decide the polic...
Yes solo maintainer.
And i appreciate luke for his work.
But this has been the main concern for years.
And i hear libre is trash gonna give it a go on secondary node
💯
nevent1qqswaa5vpsyp29258n6radga5ey0q88apnyaa9uqst7fvzcuqjzeynqpr3mhxue69uhkummnw3ezucnfw33k76twv4ezuum0vd5kzmql09nc2
Why don’t we have more options?
Isn’t knots like 99% core with just a few extra/changed lines of code? Also with it being open source isn’t it likely that it’s been reviewed by many people at home?
Murch
I have been seeing some claims that "Bitcoin Knots is part of the Bitcoin Core project", that "Bitcoin Knots is just another release of Bitcoin Core", and that "Bitcoin Knots has more contributors than Bitcoin Core".
Bitcoin Core has about 40 regular contributors with over a thousand past contributors. The Bitcoin Core project releases its software on bitcoincore.org. Bitcoin Core releases are signed by several Bitcoin Core contributors and other community members. Releases are attested to by this community.
Bitcoin Core’s source code is released under the MIT License. The MIT License is a permissive open-source license permitting anyone to do almost anything with the licensed code.
Bitcoin Knots is a project fork of Bitcoin Core. Bitcoin Knots appears to be developed by a single developer pushing directly to master without peer review. Bitcoin Knots releases are composed of Bitcoin Core’s source code modified with a patch set of about 1400 commits. The same individual unilaterally issues releases. There is no indication that anyone else has ever contributed code or review directly to Bitcoin Knots. Bitcoin Knots is not endorsed by the Bitcoin Core project.
Claims to the contrary appear to be based on a unique individual perception of reality.
View quoted note →
Interesting read, I haven’t checked but heard they are 99% the same, what is the difference between knots and core then?
True, and why we are here ?
Because Knots seems to suit better nodes values, not core.
Solution : listen also nodes owners and try to be "open" to some knots argues.
And stop saying everybody are wrong we have the ultimate truth.
There is no smoke without fire.
#btc4ever
I like running knots!
Now go diff the consensus code in core and knots and post the results
I'd prefer to use core, but the current devs involved decided to force through a change I don't agree with. Knots is the only alternative available.
Please add a Lightning wallet; I can’t zap this ⚡️
Jury is out on this one… but collectivism isn’t a path to freedom. Spam sounds like a bad idea. 👎
Exactly, you don’t need to trust 1 guy because you don’t have to update
Oofff my bad I didn’t realize there was more to post. What else has he changed in the code if all he did was mod filters?
Even if there was one maintainer, but multiple code reviews that were publicly published - that would be a major step as moving forward towards OSS peer review is the only way we can reasonably look at knots as a real option.
You go to war with the army you have, not the army you’d like.
Core did nothing as the network is spammed by people who think that bitcoin is simply a database not a monetary network. Knots implemented filters actively trying to deny those spamming the network.
And yet knots adoption is growing rapidly. This would suggest a problem or distrust with core, despite your arguments. Logical reasoning is fine, but it's only a small part of the real world.
This could be a good thing. Martin Luther was the solo dissenting voice against the Catholic Church at the time, and single handedly started the Reformation. I guess time will tell.
"More devs means higher quality dickbutt database, knots only has one dev"
Forks? Where? Maybe in the git use of the word but not the bitcoin version
Bitcoin does its own thing. Bitcoin doesn’t care.
That is your right, but you also have to be realistic in sensing how successful knots will be if the contribution structure stays the same.
Yes distrust is growing because it's easy to politicize an issue most of the people really don't know anything about.
I will not let rubbish in my node, running Knots… Bitcoin is for accounting, not VMs and JPEG…
The closest person to Martin Luther in bitcoin is Roger Ver.
1. I don't understand why people think Peter Todd is a regular contributor to Bitcoin Core. I don't think I've seen him make that claim, I've certainly not seen other contributors make that claim, and as far as I can tell, he has made three commits since 2016.
2. You will have to ask Peter why he said that and how he meant it.
As far as I can tell all Bitcoin Core contributors are only interested in Bitcoin as a monetary system, although some are more excited about nascent scaling technologies than others.
We've seen at least three waves of data transaction uses get priced out of Bitcoin so far, and just because a sober assessment indicates that it will always be possible to embed data in the Bitcoin block chain doesn't mean that any Bitcoin Core developers are motivated by that.
That said, I have in 12 years not seen a mempool policy tightening, especially not against any transaction types that had more than vanishing demand. I'm not convinced it's feasible without making it financially attractive to break rank.
If you have some time and are open to reading more, I thought Antoine's responses to various concerns were well laid out here:
Delving Bitcoin
Addressing community concerns and objections regarding my recent proposal to relax Bitcoin Core's standardness limits on OP_RETURN outputs
Hi everyone. I recently proposed that Bitcoin Core lifts its standardness limits on OP_RETURN outputs. The reason is that they are not binding any...
wrong. unfortunately is true
the beauty of freedom is bitcoin allow crap too. otherwise how would feel with cbdc if governments says : i will not allow you to do xyz with my money
Good read.
One of the reasons why I haven't rushed to make Libre Relay easier to install, e.g. with binary releases, step-by-step docs, etc. is that it's just a one man proof-of-concept/experiment and people probably shouldn't be running it on a big scale.
If it were to be widely used, I'd want more eyes on it first. And really, Core is perfectly goodfor 99% of users.
Murch
I have been seeing some claims that "Bitcoin Knots is part of the Bitcoin Core project", that "Bitcoin Knots is just another release of Bitcoin Core", and that "Bitcoin Knots has more contributors than Bitcoin Core".
Bitcoin Core has about 40 regular contributors with over a thousand past contributors. The Bitcoin Core project releases its software on bitcoincore.org. Bitcoin Core releases are signed by several Bitcoin Core contributors and other community members. Releases are attested to by this community.
Bitcoin Core’s source code is released under the MIT License. The MIT License is a permissive open-source license permitting anyone to do almost anything with the licensed code.
Bitcoin Knots is a project fork of Bitcoin Core. Bitcoin Knots appears to be developed by a single developer pushing directly to master without peer review. Bitcoin Knots releases are composed of Bitcoin Core’s source code modified with a patch set of about 1400 commits. The same individual unilaterally issues releases. There is no indication that anyone else has ever contributed code or review directly to Bitcoin Knots. Bitcoin Knots is not endorsed by the Bitcoin Core project.
Claims to the contrary appear to be based on a unique individual perception of reality.
View quoted note →
An interesting thread follows this one:
Murch
I have been seeing some claims that "Bitcoin Knots is part of the Bitcoin Core project", that "Bitcoin Knots is just another release of Bitcoin Core", and that "Bitcoin Knots has more contributors than Bitcoin Core".
Bitcoin Core has about 40 regular contributors with over a thousand past contributors. The Bitcoin Core project releases its software on bitcoincore.org. Bitcoin Core releases are signed by several Bitcoin Core contributors and other community members. Releases are attested to by this community.
Bitcoin Core’s source code is released under the MIT License. The MIT License is a permissive open-source license permitting anyone to do almost anything with the licensed code.
Bitcoin Knots is a project fork of Bitcoin Core. Bitcoin Knots appears to be developed by a single developer pushing directly to master without peer review. Bitcoin Knots releases are composed of Bitcoin Core’s source code modified with a patch set of about 1400 commits. The same individual unilaterally issues releases. There is no indication that anyone else has ever contributed code or review directly to Bitcoin Knots. Bitcoin Knots is not endorsed by the Bitcoin Core project.
Claims to the contrary appear to be based on a unique individual perception of reality.
View quoted note →
Hey
@Peter Todd , should we "just run knots" like you suggested at bitcoin++? Murch here, a core dev of some importance unlike yourself (according to him), points out that Knots is "developed by a single developer pushing directly to master without peer review." Further "The same individual unilaterally issues releases." By highlighting the less than ideal nature of knots as an open source project, it raises the question: Was your advice sincerely given? Is knots a viable alternative, and if not,, why are you proposing a change that is clearly controversial when users have no real alternative? Why are you, someone with only three commits since 2016, making such a controversial PR and then getting on stage at a developer conference to defend it on behalf of Core? The responsibile thing to do here is completely withdraw your PR, and leave such important matters to more qualified devs.
What did he say that was untrue?
Thats funny
Exactly. As bitcoin grows it's only going to get more heated I think. The ratio of devs to non-devs will get much smaller, making it even harder to gain social concensus
Murch
I have been seeing some claims that "Bitcoin Knots is part of the Bitcoin Core project", that "Bitcoin Knots is just another release of Bitcoin Core", and that "Bitcoin Knots has more contributors than Bitcoin Core".
Bitcoin Core has about 40 regular contributors with over a thousand past contributors. The Bitcoin Core project releases its software on bitcoincore.org. Bitcoin Core releases are signed by several Bitcoin Core contributors and other community members. Releases are attested to by this community.
Bitcoin Core’s source code is released under the MIT License. The MIT License is a permissive open-source license permitting anyone to do almost anything with the licensed code.
Bitcoin Knots is a project fork of Bitcoin Core. Bitcoin Knots appears to be developed by a single developer pushing directly to master without peer review. Bitcoin Knots releases are composed of Bitcoin Core’s source code modified with a patch set of about 1400 commits. The same individual unilaterally issues releases. There is no indication that anyone else has ever contributed code or review directly to Bitcoin Knots. Bitcoin Knots is not endorsed by the Bitcoin Core project.
Claims to the contrary appear to be based on a unique individual perception of reality.
View quoted note →
My pull-req was closed.
That's good. Of course there's another to uncap datacarrier by default and deprecate, which effectively accomplishes the same thing. I'd prefer no change at all, but the symbolic gesture is appreciated. 🙏
Understood. Knots keeps us true
Booooooooooooooo! I would throw a tomato at you if I could!
And yet knots has the same amount of people running it as are running core v29. Bitcoiners are built to go all the way out on the risk curve if they believe in something.
Okay, what for? For informing people about the options they're choosing from?
About 28,000 differing lines of code across 550 files and 1400 commits
Why are you including screenshots of you trusting an unreliable source?
These are screenshots I personally took of GitHub, which while flawed is where all these repositories sit currently so I am unaware of any better source being available
git itself. Learn to use it before making claims.
I have been seeing some claims that “Bitcoin is part of the modern financial system,” that “Bitcoin is just another form of currency like the dollar,” and that “Bitcoin has more decentralization than the dollar.”
The U.S. dollar is managed by the Federal Reserve System, with its 12 regional banks and a Board of Governors consisting of 7 members, alongside thousands of Treasury employees as historical contributors. The dollar’s operations are published on federalreserve.gov and treasury.gov. Dollar issuances are authorized by the Federal Open Market Committee, consisting of the Board of Governors and select regional bank presidents, with oversight from Congress and other federal entities. Releases of new currency or economic data are reviewed and endorsed by this authoritative community.
The dollar’s framework operates under the full faith and credit of the U.S. government, as a fiat currency governed by federal law since the gold standard ended in 1971. Bitcoin is a decentralized offshoot of traditional currency systems, launched by an anonymous entity known as Satoshi Nakamoto. Bitcoin appears to be maintained by a sprawling, uncoordinated network of miners and developers, pushing changes to its blockchain without centralized oversight. Bitcoin’s blockchain consists of the original decentralized ledger modified with a sprawling set of over 900,000 blocks as of May 2025. This same leaderless consensus mechanism issues new blocks and transactions. There is no indication that any established authority has ever contributed oversight or stability directly to Bitcoin. Bitcoin is not endorsed by the Federal Reserve or the Treasury.
So, let’s set the record straight: the dollar, with its centralized, accountable management, clearly outshines Bitcoin’s haphazard, unendorsed experiment.
@jack @Murch @Bitcoin Mechanic
nevent1qqswaa5vpsyp29258n6radga5ey0q88apnyaa9uqst7fvzcuqjzeynqpr3mhxue69uhkummnw3ezucnfw33k76twv4ezuum0vd5kzmql09nc2
Wow, is it easy to outline the main differences or not? I am running knots now but it is really hard as a non-coder to know what to do essentially you’re just taking sides where you can’t verify the truth yourself
For context, Bitcoin Core has something like 240'000 lines of c++ code.
I don't intend to take the time to go through someone of that magnitude, but if you want to take a look, here's the diff:
GitHub
Comparing bitcoin:28.x...bitcoinknots:28.x-knots · bitcoin/bitcoin
Bitcoin Core integration/staging tree. Contribute to bitcoin/bitcoin development by creating an account on GitHub.
Thanks, appreciate it
Tried to zap you, but you didn’t have a wallet set up
