MDB on Nostr: This is what is happening, be careful out there, think for yourself always, First and ...
This is what is happening,
be careful out there,
think for yourself always,
First and most important
The activation threshold breaks precedent.
BIP-110 proposes a 55% hash power threshold, far from the 95% standard associated with sensitive consensus changes, justified by “urgency” and the measure’s temporary nature.
Whoever normalizes 55% once has normalized it forever.
The next proposal to use that threshold won’t be about "spam."
It "activates" without consensus by design.
Miner signaling has never passed 1% since voting opened in December 2025, yet the plan doesn’t need a majority: from around early August, nodes running BIP-110 software will simply reject blocks that don’t carry the flag.
That’s a forced chain split mechanism launched from a sub-1% support base.
It cripples the "upgrade" path while calling itself temporary.
even possibly to quantum
It moves censorship from policy to consensus.
It would go beyond ordinary relay policy into block-validity enforcement,
changing consensus rules to block certain data patterns weakens Bitcoin’s neutrality
a working template for filtering any future transaction class.
It touches property.
BIP-110 may render some existing UTXOs “dead money,” effectively depriving some users of property rights temporarily,
could make some wallet-generated addresses unspendable once activated.
Freezing coins by rule change, however framed, is the exact capability Bitcoin exists to make impossible.
The timing hits the institutional thesis directly.
Bitcoin’s most attractive feature to institutional investors is the immutability of its rules; once this precedent is set, the questions become asset freezes targeting specific addresses or mandatory rule adjustments
The damage is symmetric.
Whether it activates, fails, or splits the chain, the community re-fractures along the 2017 fault lines, burning energy and credibility either way.
Some prominent supporters have already declared that if BIP-110 fails, “Bitcoin will have failed at its singular purpose”
pre-committing to a demoralization narrative on the losing side.
The most effective attack on Bitcoin was never going to be a hash war or a broken cipher, it’s a well-crafted sentence, repeated until half the network believes the other half is the enemy.
Published at
2026-07-09 05:02:14 UTCEvent JSON
{
"id": "8e47edc77ee11addc25f354512092101911931451495b4c9a80835989382dfaf",
"pubkey": "6b4c612991132cf4c6c390dceaae75041b9954ba4f9c465aca70beb350815a57",
"created_at": 1783573334,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"client",
"Primal iOS"
]
],
"content": "This is what is happening, \n\nbe careful out there, \n\nthink for yourself always, \n\nFirst and most important\n\nThe activation threshold breaks precedent. \n\nBIP-110 proposes a 55% hash power threshold, far from the 95% standard associated with sensitive consensus changes, justified by “urgency” and the measure’s temporary nature. \n\nWhoever normalizes 55% once has normalized it forever. \n\nThe next proposal to use that threshold won’t be about \"spam.\"\n\nIt \"activates\" without consensus by design. \n\nMiner signaling has never passed 1% since voting opened in December 2025, yet the plan doesn’t need a majority: from around early August, nodes running BIP-110 software will simply reject blocks that don’t carry the flag. \n\nThat’s a forced chain split mechanism launched from a sub-1% support base. \n\nIt cripples the \"upgrade\" path while calling itself temporary. \n\neven possibly to quantum\n\nIt moves censorship from policy to consensus. \n\nIt would go beyond ordinary relay policy into block-validity enforcement, \n\nchanging consensus rules to block certain data patterns weakens Bitcoin’s neutrality \n\na working template for filtering any future transaction class.\n\nIt touches property. \n\nBIP-110 may render some existing UTXOs “dead money,” effectively depriving some users of property rights temporarily, \n\ncould make some wallet-generated addresses unspendable once activated. \n\nFreezing coins by rule change, however framed, is the exact capability Bitcoin exists to make impossible.\n\nThe timing hits the institutional thesis directly. \n\nBitcoin’s most attractive feature to institutional investors is the immutability of its rules; once this precedent is set, the questions become asset freezes targeting specific addresses or mandatory rule adjustments \n\nThe damage is symmetric. \n\nWhether it activates, fails, or splits the chain, the community re-fractures along the 2017 fault lines, burning energy and credibility either way. \n\nSome prominent supporters have already declared that if BIP-110 fails, “Bitcoin will have failed at its singular purpose” \n\npre-committing to a demoralization narrative on the losing side.\n\nThe most effective attack on Bitcoin was never going to be a hash war or a broken cipher, it’s a well-crafted sentence, repeated until half the network believes the other half is the enemy.",
"sig": "70d1f1e0a44c0a600fb31c0a113f6cefc999750d2bc89a4fffefaf7292382111c475fc923e36e4a39a2da4f9ec88c47b735bb535560f664f3c641492ce9ac5e4"
}
