Matticus

It's not consensus level because Knots still accepts blocks with op_returns that are arbitrarily large. If or once it stops accepting blocks with this in it, the chain will split.

2025-09-01 15:41:22 CEST

- reply

I saw this on the PayPal app. I was like yeah I want to report the bug that your app and company is a cancer.

2025-09-01 15:38:16 CEST

- reply

0.3% of Bitcoin is earning yield on-chain is not the basis for a paradigm shift. It sounds more like a crappy advertisement for some garbage defi protocol(s). So dumb.

2025-09-01 15:26:05 CEST

I'm seeing increase in X posts that are blatant appeals to authority from the usual suspects. I'm not sure why, but it's obvious that the average person (a.k.a. normies) have a lost a lot of respect and trust in so-called "experts." In a recent post, someone compared not trusting an expert to a passenger asking an airline pilot to stand aside so the passenger could fly the plane. In so doing, it reveals ignorance regarding types of information and skill.
I think it's worthwhile to explain three forms of statements in order of their trustworthiness:
1. Is statement---which is information regarding the current state of reality. This is most reliable when based upon empirical observations that can be critiqued or replicated in tests. As such, these statements can often be verified and, more importantly, falsified. This is "knowledge" and is that in which a person can be an "expert."
2. Prediction---which is self explanatory, but it's an attempt to predict what is going to be or happen in the future, or what an empirical study may reveal. This is a "guess" and the value of it depends partly on the expertise (see above) of the person making it, but a better measure of its worth is the predictor's track record of making accurate prior guesses. Also, I am more inclined to trust a prediction if it's made with some equivocation, which reveals the predictor's humility and their signaling to their audience that it's merely a guess.
3. Ought statement---which is a normative claim that the person speaking wants to happen based on their subjective values or preferences. This is nothing more then an "opinion." Opinions are the weakest form of "information" because underlying almost always involves an arbitrary hierarchy of values that may or may not be consistent with the listeners subjective preferences. Put simply, a suggestion may have hidden trade offs that are not subjectively worthwhile for the intended goal.
One side note; a person who applies knowledge to reality can perfect that action into a skill, which can be passed on to others who may or may not have the knowledge underlying that skill. Through practice and testing, a skill can be mastered. That's what a pilot is, for example. A pilot may know how to fly a plane but may not be able to build a plane or calculate the physics underlying the flight of a plane. That information may be helpful but not necessarily necessary.
A lot of people saying "trust the experts" are often referring to ideologues in positions of authority making "ought statements," or in other words it is the opinions of a person with fancy titles. These "experts" are not always conveying knowledge or engaging in a skill, and as such, their capacity for being "correct" cannot be measured empirically. Blindly trusting them, then, is ignorant at best, and literally dangerous at worst.
Although it was not my intention, this also can apply to some of the Core v. Knox debate that I have seen. I see a lot of appeals to authority on the Core side of the debate, in which Core developers or their supporters make normative claims about what something ought to be, which is fine, but when questioned resort to hand waving about it being a technical issue beyond the understanding of the uninitiated, although this may no longer be the case (I haven't kept up).
Thanks for coming to my TED talk.

2025-08-31 03:01:40 CEST

Bitcoin is dead. Long live Bitcoin.

2025-08-29 14:31:33 CEST

- reply

I'm behind because I don't even know what spark is.

2025-08-29 13:22:31 CEST

Good morning, nostriches! Jesus loves you so much he died for you.

2025-08-29 12:41:58 CEST

- reply

This is just sad.

2025-08-26 16:00:11 CEST

"I prefer someone who burns the flag and then wraps themselves up in the Constitution over someone who burns the Constitution and then wraps themselves up in the flag."

2025-08-26 13:22:26 CEST

- reply

Good morning!

2025-08-26 13:14:35 CEST

Good morning, nostriches! Go out there and become ungovernable.

2025-08-26 13:11:36 CEST

- reply

102,500

2025-08-01 13:07:56 CEST

I knew one day nostr was going to become necessary if we wanted to maintain freedom on the Internet, but I didn't realize that day was approaching so quickly.

2025-05-12 21:21:45 CEST

Bitcoin Knots is cool but I'm already on board for the next Bitcoin implementation. Let's have like 5 of them. Having only one or two is a vulnerability.

2025-05-09 20:24:20 CEST

- reply

I'm watching interviews with some of these core devs and Shinobi and holy shit are these guys highly regarded, egotistical losers. Surely Michael Saylor, having ran a public tech company for over 30 years, has fired devs 10x better than these clowns.

2025-04-30 19:57:56 CEST

- reply

With that being said, banning someone for pointing another's potential conflict of interest is stupid and childish at best, and at worse, it will chill appropriate and relevant disclosures in the future.

2025-04-30 19:54:55 CEST

- reply

Thanks for the explanation, Matthew. I am a Bitcoin only pleb that hates ordinals and inscriptions, but I can see both sides of this issue. I think the limits on op_return is what led to jamming the segregated data with garbage. Doing the same with op_return would have been less harmful to the block chain and node runners. As such, I see the merit of trying to push garbage into the op_return format which can be more easily pruned and ignored.

2025-03-26 19:41:59 CET

- reply

I went to a top 25 law school and graduated at the top of my class. I experienced the same thing as you. They only consider T14, apparently.

2025-03-13 14:52:03 CET

Now that we have the Bitcoin protocol and the Nostr protocol are there any other freedom/ decentralized protocols left to discover?

2024-10-04 15:51:09 CEST

- reply

Well said... but you're still a statist. /s

2024-05-21 18:30:34 CEST

- reply

I'm bullish on the cumrocket etf

2024-04-29 17:31:33 CEST

Maybe it's just me but it feels like this Samurai wallet prosecution has us all on our back heels. Sometimes I think I would rather be a normie and move on from this struggle for freedom. But then I think about my children and realize that this is our last stand. If we do not have unfettered property rights, censorship resistent money, and free speech, we're dooming our posterity to a life of serfdom in a digital prison. I won't back down. This is worth the fight. #Bitcoin

2024-04-22 17:49:46 CEST

Fedimint is bullish AF! I'm excited to see what people do with these tools. #Bitcoin

2024-04-15 04:32:49 CEST

- reply

You could use this to transmit a Bitcoin transaction.

2024-02-05 19:12:55 CET

who are the best NOSTR follows?

2023-04-23 20:14:08 CEST

- reply

Sounds like something an AI would say.

2023-03-08 16:59:48 CET

All the nostriches saw this right?
https://i.imgur.com/aVCBp36.jpg