Author of “Modern Chains.” Catholic. Husband. Father of two. Former Army Officer, AH-64 Pilot. BS in Art, Literature and Philosophy from the US Military Academy. MA in Philosophy from Holy Apostles College and Seminary.
Public Key
npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 Profile Code
nprofile1qqsr3gwdr05shx5f35jpthqsrhcgwrc4kuh2y0xmpt0647kgp5p06zgprpmhxue69uhhqun9d45h2mfwwpexjmtpdshxuet5qyxhwumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmv967fa3
Show more details
Published at
2026-06-24T04:57:30Z Event JSON
{
"id": "ffc26a03a6215f1b08edd111ff9c71535814d57a0085d90edeb5aad9a3acdf5a" ,
"pubkey": "38a1cd1be90b9a898d2415dc101df0870f15b72ea23cdb0adfaafac80d02fd09" ,
"created_at": 1782277050 ,
"kind": 0 ,
"tags": [],
"content": "{\"display_name\":\"Neal BIP110\",\"name\":\"hylomorphic\",\"lud16\":\"[email protected] \",\"banner\":\"https:\\/\\/blossom.primal.net\\/d76d0ddf4f017f56ebbe1fd95095a9d2a42e2e42bce415c1e55d57510ebf5d8c.jpg\",\"website\":\"https:\\/\\/www.modernchains.com\\/\",\"nip05\":\"[email protected] \",\"about\":\"Author of “Modern Chains.”\\nCatholic. Husband. Father of two.\\nFormer Army Officer, AH-64 Pilot. \\nBS in Art, Literature and Philosophy from the US Military Academy. \\nMA in Philosophy from Holy Apostles College and Seminary.\",\"picture\":\"https:\\/\\/blossom.primal.net\\/3cb6c0e18be5a6dc40f018dcfe5ac0a245b52ee48dc911550932d1b7dccb7755.jpg\",\"lud06\":\"\"}" ,
"sig": "18fc069930901d2cc1496c3a12be035a8e67e34a9262e0baa263a684ef22b76df7c8eaf92d3b3824c47d8fa3407a90f9fd7185bebe79012d677913c6f105d20c"
}
Last Notes npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic For the people who don't like conflict and the BIP110 war, just know it is necessary. It's a gift to both sides, no matter who comes out on top. If you don't test your ideas against proof of work and put them in the fire, you have no fucking clue what they are really made of. npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic yeah, 1 is a reality check. 2 is a trade off judgment call, and honestly i can respect anyone’s call on 2 if they accept 1. 3 follows from 2 if we cant agree on a common frame of the issue, we cant have a productive dia-logos it’s just a sterile exercise npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic what is the issue with this line of reasoning: 1) acknowledge 100k makes network less defensible that 83. 2) acknowledge benefit of 100k < defense of 83 3) acknowledge BIP110 > current consensus rules #asknostr #bitcoin #nostr #core #knots #BIP110 #v30 npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic people choosing what software to run, miners choosing what chain to mine on you’re right.. so much tyranny Ironically, ur arguing if people run software that you don’t want them to run, that’s somehow a “power grab” npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic the “fork now” idea betrays the posture of superiority. people are organizing and planning according to 110s schedule. Never interrupt your enemy when they are making a mistake vs Quick you better make a mistake right now! the dust will settle soon enough lol npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic “bullying” has a negative connotation i don’t think is accurate to reality. miners, nodes, and users all work together in unison, but they are not equals. node runners have to be point man, if they are not the conductor, the ensemble will sound like shit we will see how it plays out, but i don’t know what principles reason a miner would have to not mine BIP110 compliant blocks. if they had a URSF we would have a more accurate score card, but as is, act activation block height, if u a miner if you don’t click the button, other miners could blow u up, but if u click the button, you are safe. if there is no URSF, we will only know after the fact. and honestly i wont be surprised by either outcome i think we don’t get a chain split and switch to BIP110, and that’s cause i couldn’t get anyone to provide me with a valid principled answer to why v30 was good without contradicting themselves. maybe the miners have one. but i can only go off the best arguments i can gather npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic “how miners act” 💯 npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic Must not have met many Catholics that’s ok. all the technical mumbo jumbo sits on invalid logic. here is a story to depict the error in reasoning. there was an open barn surrounded by a fence with a 80 bit gate. it does not follow logically that because the barn is open, you should tear down the gate. core v30 tore down the gate BIP110 puts a door on the barn, because v30 took down the gate. if core reverted their change, we wouldn’t need a door, because there is a gate. none of the big wig v30 advocates could articulate a principled reason why removing the gate is good for the network. it’s good for a few individuals, at the cost of the other network participates(miners, nodes, users) miners ultimately have to choose also, you keep saying hard fork, but that’s not true npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic Ad hominems just can’t be all of one’s argument. applied like salt to a nice tenderloin you should try some tenderloin btw they’re still fun, especially when true npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic lol you’re a vegan 😂 explains why ur immune to logic npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic “functionally the same” don’t tilt at windmills Bitcoin wasn’t bad on10-9-23. and making bitcoin on 10-9-23 consensus isn’t bad either. satoshi used relay policy to address data usage on chain. v30 said nah so consensus is the arbiter npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic he was also the one who made the first filter. what was functionally accomplished with relay policy prior to v30, is functionally the same accomplished at consensus with BIP110 just because you say the word “technical” does not supercede logic npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic you are still limiting what I can put in my transaction. why are u limiting me? npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic but they didn’t remove the limit, they moved the limit to 100k. So what’s the “technical” reason for 100k? why not 50k? why not 200k why not 4mb? you haven’t thought about the principles driving the decisions. npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic if you use100k OP_Return just run core v30+ if you have no need for OP_Return over 80 then signal for BIP110 with ur node npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic umm, i mean "the process" is the nature of softforks. its uncomfortable being contentious, but there again, that's the nature of it. I would say I wish it wouldn't have come to this, but it has, so whether i like it or not really doesn't have anything to do with what I must do. Like I would really love to have had genuine rational discourse about what is the optimal limit for arbitrary data for the network, because that is a legitimate issue, but again, that is not what has happened over the last year plus. the people actively advocating against BIP110 are caught in a performative contradiction. When I'm caught in a performative contradiction, meaning someone poitns out my blindspot and shows me what I am saying contradicts what I am doing, I thank them and either change my behavior or change what I'm saying. the people against BIP110 aren't doing that. through pride, lack of intelligence, or exploitative manipulation, they double down. I do ethics. I can't advocate for something or take actions I can't justify all the way down to first principles. So for me, my path is clear. npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic For me this circus showed me that bitcoin is what i thought it was, and people are what i thought they were. I’m always hopeful the people surprise me. I took to the issue like i take all philosophical inquires, gathering the strongest arguments on both sides, asking all the biggest loudest voices for their arguments. Sadly, the strongest arguments for v30 are logically invalid, inconsistent, arbitrary, or performative contradictions. I understand why v30 can be good for some individuals, but not how it can be good for the network. What relay policy functionally accomplished in 2023 was not bad then. And no one can put together a coherent argument for why protocol consensus functionally accomplishing the same thing is now bad. npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic analyzed from first principles, both sides are advocating for a limit. but only one side acknowledges that. BIP110 the v30 side is stuck in a performative contradiction every time they open their mouth on the issue. they can’t answer “why not 200k?” or “why not 4mb” BIP110 at least has a logically valid and rational justification. for 80. sure, maybe some other number for the limit is optimal, but it’s the failure of v30 to produce one valid argument for why 100k is the correct limit. npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic Ironically, both sides of the v30 vs BIP110 debate use the same principle to establish a limit. The only difference is the accident of what the limit is: 80 vs 100k If one limit is “cEnSoRInG” then so too is the other. “I want to make a full block single transaction and am willing to pay a miner for it. How dare the network censor me!” Arguing the limit of 80 censors while the 100k limit does not is a performative contradiction. It’s non-rational and invalidates itself. No matter what possible limit is in place, they all are subject to the same scrutiny. What are the tradeoffs? Why not 160? Why not 100k? Why not 200k? Why not 4mb? Hell, why not 8mb? What are the benefits? Why is the limit placed were it is? Why is the placement best for the network? What changed? Before v30, relay policy functionally prohibited OP_Return >80. There was no issue then. If protocol consensus enforces the same functional prohibition, why is that an issue now? These questions require affirmative answers and would have answers if we were engaged in good faith rational discourse. That’s the principled root at the bottom driving this entire mess. It’s probably the only producive debate anyone could have. All the other shit is a literal circus. 🤮 @nprofile…5hgl @nprofile…hw9w @nprofile…stwk @nprofile…ql08 @nprofile…xxx2 @nprofile…g6jt @nprofile…y689 @nprofile…wncc @nprofile…tnt2 @nprofile…tqyx @nprofile…c90s @nprofile…hqk9 @nprofile…krmc #BIP110 #v30 #Core #knots #bitcoin #nostr npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic It’s easy to fall into focusing on “similarities.” “This is like that” you can say a lot of true things that mean little to nothing. Philosophy is all about making the right distinctions. npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic “shouldn’t” is a category error. businesses have to serve the needs of the market else they cease to exist, minus some central planning type subsisies. also “cost more” in what terms? npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic politics makes sense once you realize the purpose of “political squabbling” is to distract people and obfuscate what the monetary system is doing. #bitcoin npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic welp, spaceboi is literally retarded. “cAn’TteLlWhATsPaMIS” isn’t even a midwit response i’m sorry he can’t tell the difference between a whale and an gorilla. the object of censorship is the content of what’s being said, sent etc and by whom. the object of filtering is the form, size, or shape. npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic privacy, like freedom, is a means not and end in itself reality is the ultimate public domain. npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic The main point of my advocacy is showing people that the money isn’t broken. the title of that book has sent people down the wrong path in terms of advocacy. macro is noise. ignores the essence of money. majoring in the minors describes when u need prescription economics is gay if you don’t understand the ethics it derives from npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic i remember going to tbr midnight showing for matrix 2. it was on a school night too lol npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic peter mccormack said “you would get along with my bitcoin friends.” so my money is on “not yet” he definately understands the federal reserve system npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic I’m not numb, as in there is a feeling there that is being snuffed out. i am happy to be free, to be outside of fiat. on a bitcoin standard, im always better off. either my savings power is ripping or my purchasing power. thats the best thing about being on a btc standard. subsume the. volatility. make it yours. you can’t do that if you think of btc as an investment. that’s still using a fiat dollar denominator. npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic If you still have the feels for the fiat price of bitcoin, quell any anxiety knowing that bitcoiners set the fiat floor. npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic it’s a great read no too long, very engaging and entertaining npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic but the big beautiful bill will make us great! ….. it’s a bad joke npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic we can cut the word “widely” it’s a wiggle word and not necessary the act of exchange itself is what brings money into existence npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic what do they have you on? npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic most people are reliably unable to show up on time. does that count? 🤣 npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic i tip my hat to you always such a smooth delivery npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic every human being is a moral agent by nature it’s a persons mode of being to think in terms of “good” “bad” “better” “worse” that’s the floor, so i play into that. every person is already doing enough “philosophy” when they get up in the morning to get the ethics. but not everyone has the “economic chops” i see it the other way around. every person can recognize ethical case. most people who can get the economics have already. point out how fiat aggresses upon them. they recognize that’s bad. ask them questions to make them think about why they have justified that aggression in the past. they will have to tear down the mental walls in their own mind, and imo that work will make them “philosophically” strong enough so the rest. meet them where they are as people speak to, encourge and train watch them grow and actualize their “philosophical” potential as a human being npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic king fu panda 3 got me with a good one today. “the more you take, the less you have.” hit really hard considering the chapter we are writing 👀 npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic Ethical case doesn’t change with price 👀 npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic verifying and securing your holdings is not to your benefit? 🤔 npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic I don’t know what you think i am saying. npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic “It relies on honest node runners protecting its fundamental purpose and not being apathetic or passive about alternative use cases that harm it and obscure its identity.” exactly, node runners serving their self interest. npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic “everyone acts in their own self interest” i think you miss the magic of bitcoin consensus it is the only way you get “money for your enemies” it the best method in history for sorting out all the contentious vectors of self interest and finding the common good. scammer’s self interest that doesn’t align with the collective interest will not form consensus so long as all the other non scammers pursue their self interest. bitcoin empowers the sovereign individual user. it’s an asymetrical defense you don’t want to fight fire with fire. tribalism vs tribalism is just gay the decade long spam war was always going to be settled at consensus npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic i have nothing to say about what any individual thinks best serves their own interests in bitcoin. But when a person says BIP110 is good or bad, they enter the dialogue and are attempting to persuade others what is in their best interests. Entering the ethical domain implies rational standards external to any one person. it is no longer simply about “what you think best serves your interest.” you have to be this tall to ride, and if you cannot make an affirmative case for why X Y or Z is good for another person, you simply aren’t tall enough for rational discourse. amorphous claims about the “greater good of bitcoin” don’t count. self contradictory arguments about cEnSoRShIp don’t count. sophistry about spam doesn’t count bitcoin is a tool, and only you can give it purpose. so whatever you use it for, run the software that best serves you. if you have cutting to be done, keep your blade sharp. So when i slow down, take a breath, and examine the arguments deliberately in the light of reason, it’s not hard to see what actions align with my interests. Bitcoin is only money to me, so I am running #knots:29.3.10 becuase it best serves my needs Just be honest with yourself about what you use bitcoin for. npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic over 40% of americans couldn’t handle a $400 emergency without credit in 2025. so it’s probably worse now npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic i don’t think profit was ever the main purpose of mining: it’s gravy mining secures the network: the main course. difficulty adjustment, halving, fees demonstrate that principle. i mean satoshi was by definition mining at a loss when it didn’t even have a price lol mining as the operating cost of bitcoin seems to point to the right direction. npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic TLDR: yes content is accidental matter. for me, the “doom” is form npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic yeah, for me the “doom” is cutting rational tether. auto piloting your life away. When i hope on social media for a particular purpose, like to promote my book, help promote other people in the space, or hear what someone has to say about something, I still feel connected. But even on nostr, where i curate my feed, I feel the difference once i just stop having a rational aim, and i just say “ill focus on whatever pops up” it kills productive momentum, deliberate and deep thought, and generally makes me feel like shit. it’s like, if i’m not driving my life, what’s the point? that’s where i arrive at the “doom” npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic which is not to say that some people do argue fallaciously, as if looks make or break your actual argument. lol human beings are strange creatures 🤣 seems like for every high point we achieve, we have to balance it out with the low npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic when u have given up autonomy of consciousness and just allow urself to float in the feed npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic picking on someone’s looks is very different than engaging with their arguments they are not mutually exclusive :) npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic getting the lightning piggy got me to up my game. finally got around to getting my own start9 server set up and running LNbits! npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic I hear you, literally and metaphorically. you speak, I speak and there is power in that. your right, individually there is “no power” but that is because that power doesn’t exist individually. it exists relationally, between us. it’s not an all or nothing, this not that, but the dynamism of our relation. so keep speaking, keep participating, and you add contribute your power to the whole npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic that analogy is correct, but it disproves your point. english isn’t just a static “protocol” it’s enacted and spoken. the way people speak english today sounds nothing like it used to sound before even though it has the same grammar hence “old english” bitcoin is a protocol language of value the same as english is. npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic an odd thing to say while still participating in advocacy. actions speak louder. performative contradictions scream. the question always remains open: what’s the right number for carrier data size at consensus? or is that too technical? npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic my life isn't a figment of imagination. neither is yours. Is the bitcoin network not made up of participants? npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic right now, consensus says nothing on the matter and lets the relay policy do all the talking. consensus needs to speak up, one way or the other. that fixes all the issues with mempools, miner fee estimations, block propagation, et al. and then we have legit consensus on data carrier size, everyone on same page. if we give a fuck about bitcoin at all, we should only be discussing in the affirmative, why one particular data carrier size is right, in order to work out consensus, to make the butter. rationally dialogue back and forth. should it 0 or uncapped? or something in between? there is a right answer. an answer that makes the network maximally valuable. it exists not in your head or in mine, but between us all. and if a person cannot make the affirmative case for what number they think is best, that speaks louder than words. they either lack the rational capacity for dialogue and should ostracized and shunned until they stfu. or they are bad/hostile actors. either way, children don’t belong at the adult table. i honestly don’t give a shit what number any person says, as long as they make the affirmative case for it. just be honest and say how much and why. whether people know it or not, they are answering that question with their actions. most people don’t even know that’s the question because they are debating whether sally said sue had a fat ass at gym. or debating self contradictory arguments about too busy tilting at windmills about “what is spam?” or “what is censorship?” if we are too fucking retarded to get it right, then we deserve this fiat hellscape we inhabit. @nprofile…yzgx @nprofile…urxs @nprofile…8ckh @nprofile…ja5u @nprofile…6xme @nprofile…nf8k @nprofile…ywzm @nprofile…yptf @nprofile…92fc @nprofile…04rp @nprofile…xxx2 @npub1lh2…a9nk @nprofile…09rd @nprofile…ddnk npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic whatever you want to call the default change in carrier data size from 83 to 100,000 that was the change in contention. it’s absurd to say it was “already blown out” else there would have been no need to change the default there are a lot of bad arguments on both sides. it’s been a pain working through them all looking for the best affirmative case for what I ought to do. npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic let’s not pretend anyone was advocating for blowing out op_return with the message “this change makes it easier for you to anchor” we heard about “censorship resistance,” block propagation, fee estimation, and miner centralization. everything but the elephant npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic Dialog hones. Iron sharpens iron. Tightening fittedness of relation. npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic 😂 it’s ok to just say the affirmative case for the change is to do stuff ontop of btc. that’s the elephant in the room no one wants to acknowledge. “block propagation” and “fee estimates” dont wet my whistle. but maybe they wet yours. i’m not forcing anyone to respond to inquiry. If you feel those authentic questions are an attack, that says more about you than anything. i have no ill will towards you or @nprofile…xxx2 🫂 npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic I advocate for bitcoin. I talk to people and try and persuade them rationally why bitcoin is good for them. the same standards i hold myself to in my advocacy for bitcoin, i hold to other advocates to. if i thought of that work as beneath me, then i wouldn’t be an advocate. if i thought everyone else was just retarded and didn’t get this simple obvious thing, then i would be a horrible advocate infact, when I have thought others as just retarded for not getting something, it’s been an indicator that i’m missing a part of the picture. it signals to me that i have oversimplified reality. perhaps that’s a takeaway from these exchanges. it’s never a bad idea to reassess your assumptions and ask “what am i missing?” one of the ironic things about being philosopher, i don’t walk around pretending i’m an amazing computer scientist, doctor, or aeronautical engineer. but yet every computer scientist, doctor, and aeronautical engineer i’ve ever met, thinks they are an amazing philosopher. npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic my understanding of printing: archival nodes can’t prune. so we need archival nodes to spin up new nodes, yes? so for an individual node runner it’s a step forward, a plus. but for tbr network as a whole, it’s no step, just stays the same at best, and bloats the chain itself at worst seems like a very meager benefit to trade for more hefty risks npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic I appreciate the suggestion but I don’t outsource my thinking to LLMs. In terms of research, I treat AI like I would wikipedia. I understand the limits of what they are capable of. I use AI, but to do very specific tasks for me. Also, for better or worse, I have never really cared “how I sound” i am more concerned with being honest with myself, pursing the truth best i can, and letting my work speak for itself. I am not bothered by someone calling me “retarded” or whatever variety of insult is in vouge. i break down complex issues into syllogisms and meticulously try to break positions. I have an aseptic approach: principles above all. That’s the best i can do, i’ll walk my path with the crowd or alone. That’s what’s important to me. npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic I understand spam can’t be stopped. It doesn’t bother me at all. The object of the question remains, as you say, “less worse usage.” Articulate in the affirmative what that means? What good comes from blowing out the op-return? npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic I know you have explained those things. Which is why I asked about the affirmative case for what benefit larger allocations of arbitrary data provide me, a regular pleb with a node on a btc standard. That’s the only answer I want. Cause that’s the essence. That’s the principle. I don’t give a fuck about personalities. It doesn’t matter how shiny the code is polished if the principles underpinning it aren’t aligned with my interest. as a person who continually steelmans many opposing sides, the complete lack of direct answers for why arbitrary data allowance should be increased is scary. I have asked and searched far and wide, and best affirmative answer I have gotten is “it will give u a faster more accurate estimation of fees.” if the only significant benefit is “it lets me do cool shit on top of bitcoin” then that’s that. for as much as you hate luke, the things you advocate for are sending a lot of people his way. npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic then: 2 pizza 40 dollars 10,000 btc now: 1 pizza 36 dollars .00047318 btc 😳😂😂😂🤣 npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic I could not agree more with you. That’s the whole bitcoin game: serving one’s self interest. I asked for your counsel because I saw that you were advocating for people not to run knots, not to run BIP110, so you are already in the persuasion game, you are already trying to convince others. Just being real man, it is a little on the nose to hear you say "I'm not going to try and convince you" after I just got done reading your entire blog post trying to convince me. I am a moral philosopher. that is literally my profession. I do nothing but study and write about “what ought one do?” There is nothing wrong with persuading others through rational dialog. I am interested in the principles behind your logic and actions because I know I get a lot of things wrong, so I am constantly revalidating my thought process, asking what am I missing? The best way I have found to deal with my blindspots is to steelman every possible position I am aware of, and then pit them against each other. Of all the contentious issues I've used this method for, this one is the most lopsided, no pun intended. I am about to spin up my new node. I was running core v28 on an old laptop and never upgraded it, but that just seems like non-participation now because we signal our self interest with our actions. Like bitcoin is going left or right, there is no pause, tick tock next block. So help me steelman the case for increasing the amount of arbitrary data per transaction. I cannot make a good affirmative case for why I should run the latest version of core, why I should reject BIP110. I guess this was my final hail mary heave to make sure I'm not making a mistake in serving my interests as a bitcoiner. npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic i appreciate the response, however it misses the point of my question. the protocol itself defines what is arbitrary. arbitrary means discretionary, literally does not matter what it is. the protocol allocates space for arbitrary data. Whatever content is in that space, the data is all good and valid to the protocol. this is the conflation, validity and censorship, that shortcut circuits the logic of the “censorship resistance” argument. validity concerns form censorship concerns content to censor is to moderate the type of content going into the space for arbitrary data the protocol does not “censor” transactions outside the protocol rules. it enforces validity; it’s a different category so censorship resistance is not an answer to “how big should the space allocated for arbitrary data should be” it’s a category error how much space for arbitrary data is a legitimate question. the space could be anywhere between 0 and 4 Mb. i agree the the essence of tbe issue is “how much space should be allocated for arbitrary data.” i agree the prior status quo was not good, because node/miner policy is not consensus. 21M for supply cap is importsnt becuase all people know the protocol rules are enforced. whatever the answer is for how much space is allocated for arbitrary data, it’s important in the same way that all people know the protocol rules should be enforcer. i’ve never used it, and have not hear anyone articulate why i would use it. I am completely open to being persuaded by the best arguments. Maybe your use case could help me understand if i’m missing something. how does allocating more space for arbitrary data serve you? npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic let’s grant that luke is hitler or the devil incarnate. with that aside, now we could get to the contentious issue: how should the network handle arbitrary data? current consensus says: do what you want with it. so it makes sense why you advocate the way you do. you have a use for arbitrary data, and I do not blame you for serving your interests. but it also makes sense why BIP110 advocates argue the way they do. they have no need for arbitrary data, and I do not blame them for serving their interests either. right now, i have no use for arbitrary data; it does not serve any interest of mine. I am on a BTC standard; it is my chosen money. just got my start9 server, my participation with the network contributes to forming bitcoins consensus so what is the affirmative case? how does the current consensus around arbitrary data serve me? npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic “transforming” is the word I think is the issue. The logic points at AI is just another tool. The matter changes but the form remains, as it always has and always will, unchanged. When they talk of “transforming” the world, changing man’s nature, and his relation to reality, it’s just absurd, logically invalid.”, and i think those youth graduates recognize that. 1) if AI erases our purpose and source of meaning, then the “transformational” camp must be correct. 2) the transformational camp is not correct 3) therefore AI cannot erase our purpose and source of meaning the human task remains the same: look at the world and your neighbor, and think how do i create value for others. that’s why philosophy will be important imo moving forward npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic i agree there is no voting our way out, and i think because of tonight, a lot more people realize that npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic yeah, i feel the same. high time preference Maybe i’m a hopeless romantic, but i think the millennial and gen z turn out is evidence they won’t be as easy to pay off. I think there are more of us at the “fuck it I’m done with this shit” stage of life npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic Not a fan of slop in general,AI or human 🤣 Is it true? Am I learning? Amish furniture has a place. Nail guns do to. npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic i think when i first followed you we had about the same follower count. you have been crushing me! npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic anything that establishes that truth is outside of your head infuriates those who believe it ain’t so. npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic just the dollar, but now i wear gloves and wash my hands immediately after handling. npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic keep crushing 🫡 npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic people are using fiat and debt as money. it’s evil money, but money all the same. npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic late for entry 🤣 but my answers: 1a) by decree. 1b) yes 💯 absolutely money. 2) it is formal slavery 3) the illusion of comfort is tempting npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic ^Great minds think alike. 🤣 “Bitcoin is not about getting rich, it is about getting free: bolt cutters, not lottery tickets. Bitcoin is an ethical instrument for personal and communal sovereignty, a declaration of independence from economic subjugation.” —Modern Chains npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic someday i hope we bump into each other at a conference or something. i think we would have a great deal of fun just talking about life and the world. npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic Only the part when Libertarians take it too far by inverting the relation of the individual to the collective and sever its tether to reality. Up to that point, it’s a very good articulation of natural law 👍 npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic necessarily npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic lol npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic even with trump as the input, we get the same neocon uniparty output. it doesn’t matter if he is a good guy or bad guy. results speak for themselves i personally think he had the best of intentions, but talk is cheap. npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic sad but true. npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic sad but true npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic The number of times your little girls will ask you to play with them is finite. I don’t take them for granted. npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic yeah, i’ll zap you and dm u an address npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic we typically do medium to light roast for our expresso. do u have one roast or do u have multiple offerings? npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic i will have to try this! npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic false, false, true npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic “There can be no serious philosophy that treats truth as independent of what is.” — correct, human interaction with ‘what is’ is in relation to truth. the first ratio, the essence of rationality, this to that “If “continuity”, rationality, ordered structure, and the persistence of identity are real in lived experience, then they must be logically and mathematically explained.” — this premise right here short circuits all the logic. the way you use “explained” is probably the bad wire that is the root of all our disagreements. the math and logic will always remain coherent with truth, that is our mode of knowing, our scientific/epistemological small world. it will never “explain” the big world it will never “explain” emergence small world empiricism cannot “explain” the big world source of being. “whether experience from within a world is sufficient to explain how such structures are produced” —cannot be. full stop. it’s non-rational to think otherwise “The world presents itself as unified to support memory, action, deliberation, and inference.” — correct there is a givenness to reality it discloses itself “But the fact that coherence is lived does not yet show how coherence is enforced.” — also correct, but it’s not a problem becuase it’s not possible. a category error to think a human can know that. “does not yet demonstrate the mechanism” — this is the non rational attempt to shove the big world into the small “One does not begin with the whole and then move inward to parts.” —Aristole, Aquinas and your lived experience say otherwise. when u open your eyes in the morning, you don’t look at ever atom, fiber, piece of furniture in your room and piece it together. you process the whole and break it into parts. *****will probably have time tomorrow to read through rest of this post**** npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic big word small word is just the rhetorical short hand the point at the necessary relation that something always exists beyond our perspective. ultimately, it’s the relation between the origin source of existence itself and that which exists. npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic why not eternal? —bitcoin is a small world we created. — work is motion, it’s a function of time blocks created by PoW is still “in time” npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic to say “time itself” is to mean “time as-such” or “the whole of all time” or everything “in time” or everything “not eternal” that real phenomena of the dynamic flow is the more holistic accounting of the principles. our rationality and the intelligibility of reality makes it possible for us to know the continuous dynamic of flow is primary to discreetness itself through a transcendental argument. we can talk about any particular measure, plank, years. hours etc, but if we lose sight of the particular’s relation to the principled whole, we aren’t talking about reality anymore. and that’s what I think philosophers do, as others dive deep into specificity and particulars, we try to make sure no wires get crossed in relation to the general principles. npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic “I am defining continuous time in the definitive sense that there is no fundamental quantized unit of time.” — agree, if you want to say there is no quantized unit of time, i’m 100% on board. but you lose me when saying therefore time is not continuous, or there is no such thing as continuous time. whatever time is, it’s essentially the dynamic relation of that which is possible, that which is, and that which was. the denial of the continuity aspect of time breaks the logic. the words and meanings we use matter, and we can’t break the whole on account of a part. npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic “Where is this continuous time you speak of?” —you tell me, you exist in it npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic with real money, “investing” is just called work npub18zsu6xlfpwdgnrfyzhwpq80ssu83tdew5g7dkzkl4tavsrgzl5yslzlyv6 hylomorphic I’ve honestly interacted with you on the logic. The same logic in Aristotle’s Physics. You are still stuck between two impasses, yet claim you have disproven the continuity of time. Ironically, you like to say “since the genesis block” as if that was the origin, but the block wasn’t the origin. Satoshi ran bitcoin, and started mining. There was a length of time where bitcoin was running and there was no discrete quantized block of time. bitcoin was running and there was no genesis block. the now, the present, the continuity of time is a necessary condition for all discrete measures. the discrete necessarily relies on the continuous. it’s not an axiom, not asserted it’s necessitated logically. demonstrated through our very existence i respect you enough to point out that’s the logic. you have not contended with it. i don’t know how else to put it, but that’s the honest truth. 🫡