Hide&Seek

~~~~~~~~~~

Public Key

npub10r37rgdjcj6yprg4fdayd58dqfxpwnr8u59nun45q4mfg3vajg0s63625r

Profile Code

nprofile1qqs83clp5xevfdzq3525k7jx6rksynqhf3n72ze7f66q2a55gkwey8cpp4mhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mqpz3mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfdu7nfmzc

Publishing to

nos.lol

relay.damus.io

relay.nostr.net

nostr.bitcoiner.social

nostr.xmr.rocks

offchain.pub

Author Public Key

npub10r37rgdjcj6yprg4fdayd58dqfxpwnr8u59nun45q4mfg3vajg0s63625r

Show more details

Last Notes

2026-05-26 16:00:23 CEST

- reply

That's not what he meant, hopefully you know that, cause no exchange ever stop a transaction to begin with and no one has ever taoked about that. Man seriously wtf 🤣🤣🤣

2026-05-26 09:14:07 CEST

- reply

No it doesn't. Decentralization solves censorship at the network level. It doesn't prevent KYC's and exchanges black listing users or locking funds, and it doesn't change the fact that Bitcoin is an open ledger with many tracking opportunities. I'm going to assume bad faith here unfortunately, because that's all very obvious.

2026-05-25 03:19:01 CEST

- reply

Yeah, me too. The post made 3 points:
1. Coinbase can blacklist your Bitcoin based on where it's been
2. miners can refuse your transactions,
3. your "decentralized" money has a permanent criminal record

2026-05-24 10:36:39 CEST

- reply

It's only addressing 1 of the 3 points though, you realize that right?

2026-05-21 15:05:47 CEST

- reply

I think you worded it very well! I'm also not trying to assert Nietzsche was an atheist, in fact probably he was not, but he might have had a spiritual life that stayed outside of any religion too.

2026-05-20 09:49:42 CEST

- reply

Could be, he didn't make much things obvious to start with 🤣

2026-05-20 03:20:02 CEST

- reply

No actually bitcoin could scale. IT resources becomes twice cheaper every two years. As a result, you could double Bitcoin throughput every two years for free, without impacting decentralization. And that's not factoring in the growth in popularity, and the astronomical growth in the block subsidie value over the last decade. Bitcoin had everything to scale up the way it needed to.
The one reason why core didn't want to do it, even though it has been the plan all along, is because of risk aversion since a hard fork can be a problematic precedent, or lead to a very complicated situation if correctly leveraged by an adversary. So we had the x4 block increase softfork instead, and we are stuck with options that don't require any hard fork, but that don't really seem to scale either.
When a bold move is needed, risk aversion will have terrible consequences and that's basically what happened.

2026-05-20 02:39:42 CEST

- reply

I disagree, he definitely condamned metaphysics as the fantasy of suffering people trying to escape this world. He calls it afterworlds, or backworlds, and there's a chapter about it in Zarathustra.
He also took any belief and values to be a necessary human creation, but seemed ro claim that outgrowing those and chosing your own values and belief was the ultimate act of creation for yourself and mankind. (And has been the ultimate act of creation from the prophets of the past)
I'm not sure what to make of Nietzche exactly or what he had in mind with going in this direction, but a very simple to way to sumarize is thought is that he proned a form of radical self-sovereignty that wanted anything ruling upon the individuals out of the window.
That being said, I don't think that excludes spirituality per say, and I don't think that's a statement on whether or not metaphysical things do exist.

2026-05-12 02:46:58 CEST

- reply

That's because you do it once a year 🤣

2026-05-02 09:21:15 CEST

- reply

Yeah, also wasn't there a flaw in that protocol
Besides, what you said is false too because anonymity set can't be larger than the number of users. You can shuffle a million time, but if there are 50 users and 40 of them are very bad people it's not going to help much right? On the other hand, you can churn Monero transactions a few time and get an anonimity set that's significantly larger than that.
Honnestly I think Bitcoiners silently dropped privacy as a goal.

2026-04-26 16:19:14 CEST

- reply

Not as insane as centralized/multisig money... Hence bitcoin (is this community seriously devolving??)

2026-04-10 04:24:12 CEST

- reply

Well, at least I can still write sentences with proper arguments to communicate with my peers. So, don't be surprised if the dumbfuck is still there tomorrow morning, looking at you from the mirror of your bathroom.

2026-04-09 11:28:36 CEST

- reply

Though in Monero every coin is tainted.
I once bought some on an exchange, withdrew it, and later redeposited it to same sam CEX to sell it back. If you know monero, it means they can see it came from them, right?
Still got a proof of fund request for that little $100 stack. Dropped that exchange ofc but clearly the conclusion is: every monero is tainted. Cause "tainted coins" in practice means: it get you signaled as a bad actor.
After all, the new normal is that you are a criminal unless you can prove otherwise. Though at least it's fungible right. 😂

2026-04-03 06:12:04 CEST

- reply

Ahahaha 🤣🤣🤣

2026-04-03 06:11:11 CEST

- reply

Note the "a subject that *may* not exist"... Great job at acknowledging you're not a person!! 🤣🤣🤣

2026-04-03 05:43:00 CEST

- reply

@nprofile…fm4n : and this is engineered.
#nevent1q…f9yh
https://blossom.primal.net/0c981d184e66ebf73fa811ab63c841a944ff4d7182cb5992817fef734f34c152.png

2026-04-03 03:25:22 CEST

- reply

But why 🤔

2026-04-02 17:27:46 CEST

- reply

Good to see someone being grounded about that tech. 100% agreed 👍

2026-04-02 06:06:22 CEST

- reply

Just going to put that here: It's the proliferation of their *own* money that they cannot control that is causing that state of the world. Just thought it's something to mind, cause for all the good I see in Bitcoin, it won't stop them from printing their shit.

2026-04-02 06:04:02 CEST

- reply

Legend

2026-04-02 06:03:05 CEST

- reply

My dude still lives in the 80s 🤣🤣🤣

2026-04-01 21:41:07 CEST

- reply

Happy New Year 😁

2026-04-01 21:39:29 CEST

- reply

yeah sure cause maximalism didn't look like a religion enough as it was 🤔

2026-04-01 21:26:43 CEST

- reply

In a feudal system, laws are only for the plebs. The fact that the ruling class will always have access to financial privacy & tax evasion as a privilege is how they get to beat society at the money game.
They can do it openly among themselves, to no consequences. But if one of us dare claiming just the same right they gave themselves, suddenly we are treated as a bad actor. Rigged game. 🤔

2026-04-01 21:21:22 CEST

- reply

Really can't understand that mindset. AI have been feeding out fiat speculation and the biggest gov subsidies ever. It also has totalitarian implications. It's literally shitcoiner than shitcoins.
At least, some (rare) altcoins have produced decentralized infrastructures and/or interesting crypto. 🤔

2026-03-30 03:21:59 CEST

- reply

Mondays? 🤔

2026-03-29 03:12:15 CEST

- reply

Is that really what he meant? I mean it's really weird indeed but I wonder what did he has in mind precisely, in term of implementation...

2026-03-29 03:10:05 CEST

- reply

Actually most maximalists won't criticize monero and give it a pass. As for which coin with prevail, it's not only about their intrisics qualities, but also about how the general context will evolve. The more adversarial the gov, the more monero will grow. The more friendly the gov, the more bitcoin will grow.

2026-03-28 02:23:06 CET

- reply

lame 😤

2026-03-28 02:17:44 CET

- reply

No. The first clue was: the guy is a fucking politician, my dude!!

2026-03-27 08:51:41 CET

- reply

I think that's both a logical & a technical fallacy, because dozens of thousands of nodes are already verifying the blockain. If there was any fraudulous transaction in there, we'd know, or else it's utterly broken.
The idea that everyone needs to verify the blockchain is not only preposterous, it's also a complete misunderstanding of Satoshi explicit design, and reading that kind of crap from a new node implementation isn't great at all. 🤔
If you understand Bitcoin, then you know that *you can trust the network as a whole not to include any fraudulous transaction*, you're definitely no just "trusting someone else", duh!

2026-03-27 08:43:24 CET

- reply

An intelligence test is by definition impossible, because real intelligence implies the ability to dodge an intelligence test if the context requires it. 🤯

2026-03-27 08:37:21 CET

- reply

I think resistance is good in that it signals distros they'll loose their users if they try to enforce age verification, but as usual I despise people pushing confusing/disingenuous/false assertions for the sake of the cause.
There are many ways to resist, and frontal opposition is not always the best strategy for a given entity. Some of them will leave obvious loopholes. Some of them will pretend to try & fail. Some of them will stop halfway, and others will make sure to produce an open alternative on the side.
Just because an entity or a person isn't obviously vocal doesn't mean they don't care. Just because some isn't frontal doesn't mean they are a traitor to humanity. Don't judge the results before the action even happens.
Resistance is good, but finesse is key!
#nevent1q…fp6a

2026-03-27 08:26:49 CET

- reply

Just going to put that here: "implementing are verification" is misleading, other distros are just using vanilla systemd that has a added a field for birthdate, which not only you don't have to fill but also there's no UI to fill it now.
Ofc some of these distros will end up complying, but it'll probably be opt-in & let you decided whether or not you want to fill it, and/or enforce it only in specific region.
Real enforcement won't happen at the OS level but at the website level, where websites will lock you out if you don't have the age AND are in a legislated region.
Anyway it's just too early to know which distro will do what, and using systemd is not a relevant signal these distro will mess with you for the time being...

2026-03-25 11:01:50 CET

- reply

Good luck with that :p AI is a coinless shitcoin my dude 😂

2026-03-25 11:00:31 CET

- reply

I think it's just a way to let technical divergences play out in a more sane/secure/informed way than with Knots, without producing too much risks for an hard fork.
Personally I'd be up for *really* having multiple implementations building consensus. Naively, I don't think an implementation causing a minority hard fork is all that bad since miners have a huge incentive to fix asap anyway. 🤔

2026-03-25 00:03:02 CET

- reply

To their point they didn't say core should stop existing 🤔

2026-03-24 05:01:38 CET

- reply

Bitcoiners 5 years ago: multisig bridge are evil scams!!
Bitcoiners now:

2026-03-24 04:59:30 CET

- reply

Remove the word 'genius' & it doesn't contradict the fact that it totally sucks anymore.

2026-03-24 03:36:59 CET

- reply

Very interesting, would love to talk with him, unfortunately he didn't even try to address the technical points raised Ver, which is a little weird for a cypherpunk technical guys who has the whole bitcoin picture in his head.

2026-03-24 03:03:17 CET

- reply

It's really weird to prefer the centralized version vs. the decentralized one. What about security lol. Also, you might very well know the people running your fedimint (that's actually the original use case), and not know your Cashu provider.

2026-03-24 02:59:44 CET

- reply

Your can avoid both by having your VPN spying & routing you 🫵

2026-03-24 02:54:45 CET

- reply

#monero giga-pump 🤔

2026-03-23 16:01:39 CET

- reply

Is that a new kind of insult or something?

2026-03-23 14:45:44 CET

- reply

Never say never, but you are a wise man. 🫡

2026-03-23 14:44:10 CET

- reply

With all due respect, if pointing out at other, unrelated attack vectors is a valid answer then let's all drop all form of security consideration altogether.
The alternative is of course to give it a serious thought through adversarial thinking and poking at the holes... As I already stated it's not just buffer overflows: for example your API sends request and it's really great to send messages back to home such as e.g. a hash of a block. Way different from exploiting a codec.
Generally speaking, the idea that WASM is fully isolated is incorrect because in order to be useful you give it access to interfaces that are not necessarily well secured. As soon as you give it an API, and maybe memory chunks that could be interpreted on the other side, it opens interesting opportunities... Especially as abritrary execution is already available free!
Agreed that UX can mitigate that, but even then I see it as a big welcome sign for all sorts of abuses. And you can be certain people will click on it. ;)

2026-03-23 12:58:55 CET

- reply

I understand your point, but this is not adversarial thinking.
What I see is that it's opening the door for me to run arbitrary code on juicy target (bitcoiners/developers) machines. I also have an amazing delivery vector — no need to click on a .exe, no need to open a attachment, just a client opening an event in the background.
Now, I just need to find a way to break that compartimentation, and I'm pretty sure the API, if not some implementation bug, is going to give me just that... ;)
(And to be honnest, I didn't dig into it in details so I might be wrong; I'm sharing first impressions after a quick read, but I can already see the opportunity there!)

2026-03-23 02:07:57 CET

- reply

This is Javascript all over again: I can run malware, spyware, viruses, mine Monero... Except I don't even you to connect to my website: all I need is a trending note... Why?? 🤔

2026-03-22 02:15:58 CET

- reply

Man you really need to chill 🤔🤭

2026-03-22 02:06:15 CET

- reply

All problems left pending & unresolved in Bitcoin have already been solved by Monero...

2026-03-22 02:02:09 CET

- reply

Chill man 🤔

2026-03-22 02:00:13 CET

- reply

Cause people want private communications 🤔

2026-03-22 01:53:24 CET

- reply

I think it's true of any cause & any ideology — anything that can excuse bad behavior works.

2026-03-21 02:33:01 CET

- reply

A good cause = a perfect cover for all the sociopaths out there.

2026-03-21 02:27:30 CET

- reply

This one makes me think hard 😂

2026-03-20 03:07:26 CET

- reply

email's not very secure in the first place 🤔

2026-03-19 21:40:03 CET

- reply

Mining pools doesn't control anything, any miner is free to switch mining pool anytime. Also, concentration of wealth & decentralization of the infrastructure are two different things. Reasoning from facts doesn't prevent cherry picking 🤔

2026-03-19 03:16:00 CET

- reply

Also having a way to mirror youtube channels in nostr and watching the vids without ads could be a killer feature :p

2026-03-19 03:14:28 CET

- reply

Interesting, though your conclusion is just wrong: Nostr became easy to use only recently, and many people who tried & left because of the poor UX now need to be convinced to come back. As someone who wanted to use Nostr, left and came back, I know for sure that whatever is being done nowadays is indeed working.

2026-03-19 02:43:03 CET

- reply

Very interesting, thanks! Though now I need to be convinced that such a quantum computer could emerge within two decades. I'm always given this as a fact, but it seems a very weak asumption.

2026-03-18 06:44:48 CET

- reply

I've tried a lot of distros as well. Smaller distros usually end up breaking in bad ways because maintaining the whole thing durably is just an insane amount of work.
At the end, sticking with the basics saves you a lot of time & trouble, and lets you focus on actually doing thing with your machine.

2026-03-18 02:46:18 CET

- reply

its funny they made the deficit so small

2026-03-18 02:41:36 CET

- reply

Just use Kubuntu🤔

2026-03-17 11:30:08 CET

- reply

Bear market rally. Big player's pocket are far from full.

2026-03-17 11:25:09 CET

- reply

Can't Primal access that same data in the first plact though?

2026-03-17 11:15:03 CET

- reply

what's the deal with spark?

2026-03-17 11:11:55 CET

- reply

"Reuters took into account Banksy's privacy claims — and the fact that many of his fans wish for him to remain anonymous. Yet we concluded that the public has a deep interest in understanding the identity and career of a figure with his profound and enduring influence on culture, the art industry and international political discourse.
In so doing, we applied the same principle that Reuters uses everywhere. The people and institutions who seek to shape social and political discourse are subject to scrutiny, accountability, and, sometimes, unmasking."
Too bad they don't feel that way about the pedos who run the world. Scumbags.

2026-03-17 02:36:08 CET

I just spent 15 minutes on spark memes & bashing, and I still don't know what it is, how it works, and what's precisely the problem with it... People bashing & meming might feel good about it, but they are definitely not promoting education. 🤔

2026-03-15 14:28:58 CET

- reply

The first cup moistens my lips and throat.
The second cup breaks my loneliness.
The third cup searches my barren entrail, but to find therein some thousand volumes of odd ideographs.
The fourth cup raises a slight perspiration; all the wrongs of life pass out through my pores.
At the fifth cup I am purified.
The sixth cup calls me to the realms of the immortals.
The seventh cup - ah, but I could take no more! I only feel the breath of the cool wind that raises in my sleeves.
Where is Paradise? Let me ride on this sweet breeze and waft away thither.

2026-03-12 02:46:12 CET

- reply

fastest EV adoption is in China ;)

2026-03-11 02:03:21 CET

- reply

And then some Epstein leak will reveal that these guys pushing for total control are actually the pedos. (confidence: 80%)

2026-03-10 10:38:13 CET

- reply

Einstein? 🤔

2026-03-04 06:14:18 CET

- reply

OMG, people trying to sound smart debating terms they don't understand. 🤦
Permissionless means that everyone can use bitcoin, run a node & mine without an authorization from a central authority.
Does anyone here want a government to KYC us before we can even use bitcoin?? (except for Luke & Mechanic, who might actually mean that)
Some of you guys should start by learniny the basics before trying as heroic bitcoin defenders lol. (obviously, not talking about @nprofile…vnu3 here...)

2026-03-02 09:24:47 CET

And the follow-up, because it's so gross I just can't keep it to myself:
"Thank you for the reply and uploaded information. We will review if you have returned to ******* and will contact you if you haven't."
#nevent1q…n5rk

2026-03-01 16:14:34 CET

Just received that bitcoin ad. They're really giving their all on that one!
"Thank you for the reply. We apologise for our reply. To complete the verification, please still provide the following: We have noticed that you are in ******* for a while now. Can you please advise on the length of your visit? Have you moved abroad permanently? When are you planning to return to *******? You have 14 days to complete the process otherwise your Curve account may become blocked."
(Yes, they took 3 months to process my reply and now are pressuring me for delays they can't handle anyway. That's the kind of company they are 🤔)
#nevent1q…e4gz

2026-03-01 05:30:07 CET

- reply

If it weren't temporary it would kill all chances of ever scaling bitcoin 🤔

2026-03-01 05:28:41 CET

- reply

Interestingly, previous Jack's company also had intelligence at its core, as we've seen with the Twitter leaks. 😂

2026-03-01 01:13:36 CET

- reply

Fully agreed, multiple layers of divide & conquer strategies. We need level-headed peers who stay unswayed by it, and know how to expose their views without picking a war. 🤔

2026-02-28 18:43:33 CET

- reply

Who said we can't do anything about it though? Certainly not me. ✊

2026-02-28 06:45:10 CET

- reply

When both side are wrong, picking one is wrong. "The community" is mostly busy building or living their life & lost interest in that little war a long time ago.

2026-02-28 05:41:32 CET

- reply

I didn't dig deep, but what the timelines seems to show is that, each time Epstein provided money to members the community it was short-lived,. You'd imagine that's because someone ended to run a background check and detected the red flags.
Cypherpunks are first and foremost a bunch of security-oriented paranoid that will instantly consider how someone like that could be leveraged against them & bitcoin.
Now, Back on the island is a whole other thing and it definitely calls for transparency. I also wonder how fast after that he did cut the financial ties.

2026-02-28 05:32:08 CET

- reply

I think it's a fallacy. Just because it's not perfect doesn't mean it's not helping. BIP110 would definitely reduce spam. It's just that the cons are unaxceptable & the whole process is fucked up anyway.

2026-02-28 05:28:50 CET

- reply

Just because you failed at doing the right thing doesn't mean you should suddenly engage in doing the wrong one. Tearing the community apart in a sloppy engineering contest & personal attacks is not going to fix anything.

2026-02-28 05:25:27 CET

- reply

I would agree with you here. I think he had to put significant efforts into it, and I think it would be both harder and more expensive to make it BIP110 compatible.
So basically he's making two points:
- A motivated state actor will always be able to put contiguous csam on bitcoin if they decide to do so. — you just won't fix that.
- If we make it more expensive for spammers, we might end up in a situation where the spam becomes more damaging in order to get in anyway.
However, he's also showing that counter-measures make spamming significantly more difficult. The problem being, once someone writes and standardize a work-around, it becomes easy again (just more expensive).
Personally I would still favor easy/non-damaging counter-measures, but not as aggressive as BIP110 that will clearly come back to bite us.

2026-02-28 05:12:31 CET

- reply

Resist to what? Personally, I would resist to bad engineering & bad faith, which in my view is *both* core v30 and BIP110.
If we keep going down that path, it could very well kill bitcoin. I want quality contributors & quality contributions. I think everyone should enforce have the same high standards.
I still think spam issues can be mitigated, but this needs to be done well by someone who's level-headed, not as some personal vendetta that doesn't care for the consequences.

2026-02-28 00:50:18 CET

- reply

Actually current block subsidies are about $200,000 so it's about $475 per transaction. It's impressive how much of the security is paid by monetary emission. Though otoh bitcoin price doubling every 4 years is enough to compensate the halving.

2026-02-28 00:30:33 CET

- reply

I saw that, not sure how accurate the "I could do one that respect BIP-110" claim is, since he didn't, but I guess that would be more of the same tricks.
I still fallback to the same idea that, just because you can't make it perfect doesn't mean you shouldn't try to improve it. I still think OP_RETURN should be capped and doing crazy shit should be made hard. Otoh I don't need to be convinced BIP-110 is a bad upgrade, since it's been my point all along.

2026-02-27 23:42:26 CET

- reply

No, what he's saying is that making it BIP-110 compatible requires more tricks but is nonetheless possible without breaking continuity.

2026-02-27 18:42:00 CET

- reply

I am not completely convinced of that continuity is meaningless. While are right that states & adversaries use csam against freedom projects, that's not a valid reason not to have measures against it. On the contrary, it is then quite logical to raise some defenses to limit their leverage.

2026-02-27 04:35:03 CET

- reply

This is not true: OP_RETURN has been uncapped at the consensus level since its introduction in 2014, the attack vector was open all along and everyone technical knew about it, including the press.
You are actually contradicting yourself by affirming both "OP_RETURN is not the only vector" and "v30 opened this attack vector"... in the same message 🤦.
You also reject that capping OP_RETURN would be a sufficient change, but pretends that RDTS is doing nothing more than reversing Core v30... 🤔
Since you can't ignore that your arguments are loaded with technical and logical fallacies, and since you are essentially taking your peers for manipulable morons, I can only conclude that the good of Bitcoin isn't the point here. Sad to see a long-term contributor go down such a path, but at this point this is clearly malicious behavior.
Thank you for your past contributions. May you someday come back to your senses. 🫡

2026-02-26 14:18:33 CET

Ideology is the mind-killer. Ideology is the little death that brings total obliteration. I will face my ideology. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past me I will turn to see ideology’s path. Where the ideology has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.

2026-02-26 14:03:22 CET

- reply

Not at all, it was very interesting. If people can't read then they are the ones cutting themselves away from quality knowledge, and there's no fix to that. 🤔

2026-02-26 13:19:30 CET

- reply

This is exactly how you're supposed to feel during a bearmarket. That way, big finance can hoard up the coins while retail stays out of the game til the next FOMO 🤔

2026-02-26 09:50:01 CET

- reply

What I don't understand is, if contiguous, illegal content is the major concern here, why not exclusively focus on capping OP_RETURN and going for the kill? Why mixing it with additional restrictions that are addressing a different, less pressing issue, and that will objectively cause the whole thing to fail, when you had a clear shot at getting the high priority issue fixed?
Also, we've been aware of this attack vector for so many years? Why is it suddenly an emergency now, when even the press has been talking about it for at least a decade & contiguous illegal content could have been posted on chain anytime by a well organized adversary?
Finally, why pretending it's just reversing what core v30 did, when you can't ignore this bip is doing much more than that?

2026-02-26 00:28:19 CET

- reply

You are just being voluntary obtuse in order to win an argument. Anyone can pretend not to understand a point. Also, you talk like you are charge, but it's not like anyone is going to adjust anything at that point, right? It's just one small group trying to impose their views to everyone else no matter the disagreements, and going to fail achieving anything at all for that very reason. 🤔

2026-02-25 17:48:26 CET

- reply

Well, I think I did both in my previous notes. BitVM, Ark and lightning are all going to suffer from this, and we're not talking about some speculative work, we're talking about updates that have been researched & pending way longer than BIP110. The update process in Bitcoin is not about pushing & bullying but about proving to the community that your solution is the absolute best one we can think off, and that the downside have been carefully thought about.
So not only BIP110 is a bad upgrade, but it would indefinitely prevent other, much better designed upgrade that have properly been trying to build consensus for longer than it has. 🤔

2026-02-25 16:27:42 CET

- reply

Wouhou! My first zap, thank you friend 👍

2026-02-25 16:25:25 CET

- reply

Ah, thanks! Wallet wasn't linked. Mind trying now? 🙏

2026-02-25 10:09:21 CET

- reply

Well, you are right, the technical arguments matter more. My issues are:
- The restrictions are too aggressive and hurts moneraty use cases and scaling solutions, even though the authors are not fully honnest about this.
- Among other issues, the proposal blocks any further upgrade to the consensus, which we will need to improve scaling through Ark & Lightning. (imagine if it were to last...)
- I don't believe a temporary fix makes sense considering the risks that come with changing the consensus, I don't want Bitcoin to go for Monero-like yearly updates/debates.
- Moreover, temporary already implies the solution is known to suck, and no good solution is available yet. I prefer to wait for a proper fix and activate that.
I think it would be more sensible to go for straightfoward, atomic, consensual fixes and respect the process of convincing the community more widely, as previously accepted forks did. Of course it won't be possible to go as far in terms of restricting spam, but it will also avoid stupidely hurting our owns.

2026-02-25 09:12:36 CET

- reply

I think this is a bit disingenuous, because the tradeoff will be exactly the same a year from now. And that's the very reason why 'there's nothing more permanent than a temporary solution'.
I find it fascinating that both the BIP110 crew and the core v30 one borrow abundantly from the covid era rhetoric & strategies in order to impose non-consensual changes on the community.
You guys are really a beautiful pair! Going at each other's throats, but united in your belief that Bitcoin is yours to rule over... Unable to realize that the community's resistance is rooted in reasonable, logical, and poorly addressed objections