Jehu

Public Key

npub16czlgmddchznje45v7v9dcwknrl3fzajzmyvyzh5kfaghvgjlgjqlehup9

NIP-05 Address

[email protected]

Profile Code

nprofile1qqsdvp05dkkut3fev66x0xzku8tf3lc53wepdjxzpt6ty75tkyf05fqpp4mhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mq4sq9mw

Publishing to

nos.lol

Author Public Key

npub16czlgmddchznje45v7v9dcwknrl3fzajzmyvyzh5kfaghvgjlgjqlehup9

Show more details

Last Notes

2026-02-08 16:10:22 UTC

Thanks to @tauri for this:
BIP110 is not an improvement protocol in the traditional sense. Normally, a BIP exists to optimize or expand a feature that is already functioning as intended. That is not what BIP110 is trying to do. BIP110 is attempting to correct behaviors that undermine long-standing design assumptions of Bitcoin. It is less about adding functionality and more about preserving the conditions that allow Bitcoin to function as sovereign, verifiable money. The real risk here is not stagnation, it is gradual drift in protocol norms and network culture that quietly changes what Bitcoin is optimized for.
The argument that BIP110 does not improve Bitcoin’s moneyness misses a lot of nuances. Money derives its strength from reliability, predictability, and broad verification accessibility. Monetary premium depends heavily on trust minimization and the ability for individuals to independently verify the ledger. When the network begins incentivizing large amounts of arbitrary data storage, it introduces new costs and new legal and operational attack surfaces that are unrelated to monetary settlement. Historically, the strongest forms of money are those that remain narrowly focused on settlement rather than attempting to serve as multipurpose infrastructure. Gold maintained monetary dominance not because it was the most versatile metal, but because its primary function remained monetary settlement. Bitcoin’s value proposition follows a similar logic.
The stenography defense also ignores the incentive asymmetry being created. When actors can embed large volumes of arbitrary data at minimal cost, node operators become involuntary custodians of that data indefinitely. The economic burden of long-term storage and validation is socialized across the network, while the economic upside is captured privately by those monetizing inscriptions, rare sats, or similar mechanisms. Bitcoin’s fee market is supposed to align cost with resource consumption. When that alignment weakens, the result is gradual pressure toward node centralization and higher barriers to independent verification. That is not a theoretical concern, in fact it strikes directly at Bitcoin’s core security model.
There is also a practical operational impact. Excess arbitrary data competes for blockspace and validation resources that would otherwise serve monetary settlement. Over time, this degrades node efficiency and increases the hardware and bandwidth requirements required to fully participate in the network. Bitcoin’s resilience depends on keeping verification cheap and widely distributed. Every increase in baseline validation cost moves the system slightly closer to reliance on specialized infrastructure.
The claims regarding mining decentralization and Libre Relay are naively misplaced. Mining centralization is primarily driven by reward distribution models like FPPS, which concentrate risk management and capital requirements inside large pools. Mempool policy tightening does not create this centralization dynamic. If anything, reducing externalities in block construction can help align incentives more closely with efficient transaction selection. Solutions like DATUM directly target mining centralization by reducing reliance on centralized block template construction and enabling miners to participate more independently. That addresses the actual structural cause rather than peripheral symptoms.
The points raised about Cashu and OP_SUCCESS also miss the broader prioritization question. Cashu introduces alternative trust tradeoffs that may improve convenience or privacy in specific contexts, but it does not fundamentally expand Bitcoin’s core settlement guarantees beyond what layered solutions like Lightning already provide. OP_SUCCESS may enable certain specialized use cases, such as inheritance mechanisms, but those applications remain niche and can be implemented through other mechanisms without expanding the base layer’s attack surface. Bitcoin’s base layer has historically erred on the side of minimalism precisely because every opcode and every feature becomes a permanent consensus commitment with unpredictable long-term consequences.
Every capability targeted by BIP110 represents either a demonstrated or plausible vector for resource externalization and protocol abuse. When systemic abuse is tolerated, the network becomes harder to verify, more expensive to operate, and more vulnerable to regulatory and infrastructure capture. Meaningful innovation is difficult to build on top of a deteriorating base layer. BIP110 attempts to stabilize that foundation by tightening rules that reinforce Bitcoin’s original security and incentive model.
@bip 110 @tauri

2026-02-04 01:40:49 UTC

- reply

(Tone Vays)

2026-01-31 00:14:08 UTC

- reply

Know privacy, Know freedom

2026-01-30 18:25:59 UTC

- reply

Thanks for the idea!

2026-01-30 17:23:54 UTC

- reply

Try a trip to El Zonte for a little hope

2026-01-29 03:01:16 UTC

- reply

But have you been to the fudge factory in Uranus, Missouri? Don't miss it!

2026-01-25 23:34:48 UTC

- reply

Wish this was available in more countries:
https://primal.net/e/nevent1qqsycvar3h7sjxamepu2zvv6wuhswn34y40y3pqcanwklt52unkle8qendtu9

2026-01-25 22:41:53 UTC

- reply

I'm not saying it's bad but Hegalian Logic is playing out IRT.. Thesis <> Antithesis ..

2025-12-13 13:41:07 UTC

- reply

Or today.. Daniel 7:25, Exodus 20:8, COVID isn't first time you've been lied to.
Organized religion is big business though so be somewhat wary of all..

2025-12-10 01:51:55 UTC

- reply

No but a device or two could be fried slightly sooner. SWIDT

2025-12-04 20:14:13 UTC

- reply

https://primal.net/e/nevent1qqsr74j83wrcu3uqnuvewuqd2sl969yuxy8fe2pj092fqkvf3zfe67sphf5ms

2025-12-04 20:13:35 UTC

- reply

Taken from a post I'll link ..
Now, for the pain points. She had her Square POS app running in retail mode and Bitcoin didn’t show up on her checkout screen as an option even after she had turned it on. We had to switch her app to standard POS, which she was more happy to do but that was far from ideal since it required so much handholding on my part. I definitely wouldn’t have been able to do that at a busy coffee shop for example. Is there any reason why Bitcoin is only available in standard POS mode? @miles you guys should definitely look into a fix.
We need to have a step by step guide to assist..

2025-12-02 20:31:11 UTC

- reply

Are there maps besides btcmap.org (glitchy lately). Don't want to go through extensive sign up process for CashApp just to use a map..

2025-12-01 19:56:46 UTC

- reply

Where is the Bitcoin preferred sign?
Accepted sends a negative vibe..

2025-11-23 11:57:09 UTC

- reply

Worse to who?

2025-11-19 00:54:50 UTC

- reply

$123,456

2025-11-11 15:39:04 UTC

- reply

It's on par or greater than Steak N Shake. Process @ SNS is very slick.
Would you consider commenting on BIP 444 Game Theory per this (if you aren't planning to already)..
https://njump.me/naddr1qq245anx2skn2sn8x9u8q3zgxgckydz3gexkuq3quf3w6w3z4kxy0zc80m6a03tt9s7855c9r8kkjmkju47xtc28l09sxpqqqp65wvdyccp

2025-11-10 16:09:20 UTC

- reply

Put it on btcmap.org if it's not there already..

2025-11-10 14:18:29 UTC

- reply

Nick Zsabo on the other hand..

2025-10-26 23:39:40 UTC

- reply

Also who is to say they (30 adopters) aren't paid and/or have motives other than freedom money..

2025-10-26 17:20:29 UTC

- reply

I'd sell the data for real money... obviously

2025-10-24 17:23:54 UTC

- reply

Can you hear what you just said?

2025-10-04 11:34:18 UTC

- reply

Where is the outrage. Oliver K must be sent to prison. 🤔

2025-10-02 17:45:16 UTC

- reply

I'm presently assuming any Segwit transaction is a Segwit discount transaction.

2025-10-02 17:42:13 UTC

- reply

Thanks! I'll look into the link posted as well. Will be looking to see if removing datacarrier would prohibit any kind of basic single sig or possibly multisig monetary only transaction even if it is Segwit or Taproot.

2025-09-26 10:53:18 UTC

- reply

Hey Luke. Happy to hear about the wedding and future family. It'll all work out!

2025-09-22 11:01:03 UTC

- reply

N45.577 W122.116

2025-09-15 21:55:04 UTC

- reply

Hat trick!

2025-09-15 17:36:39 UTC

- reply

Agreed:
"The best thing you can do is get some fresh air and some exercise."
Also go anti authority and run Knots the way you want to without asking permission - but only if you want to!

2025-09-06 19:38:59 UTC

- reply

There is a glimmer of hope for the USA after all!

2025-09-03 00:33:33 UTC

- reply

I'd like to see Matthew Kratters response or thoughts on this article. Thanks to the Author for providing this analysis!

2025-09-01 18:27:02 UTC

- reply

As you are saying but needs emphasis. All Christians are Israel. It's really not a place. Deception everywhere..

2025-09-01 18:15:47 UTC

- reply

Used tracking disrespector! Also actually tightened some defaults even more in Knots.
Like Luke's reference to Jesus driving out money changers in use of the name Knots

2025-09-01 15:36:20 UTC

- reply

I like that Knots / Core..

2025-08-31 20:44:20 UTC

- reply

1) He may grow up eventually
2) You got this. Things often happen for a reason..

2025-07-01 14:59:28 UTC

- reply

Amen

2025-05-08 02:05:18 UTC

- reply

Nice! I like the lighting and the elevated benefits!

2025-05-06 13:23:44 UTC

- reply

Good morning 🌞. Like Matthew at Bitcoin University. Spend and Replace. Focus on circular economy and small business allies..