<unnamed>

Public Key

npub1emcrzjgx0xfrm8qyp0ts5rvchqpsuz36q4dh47vc40vau28g9jfqphvwkj

Profile Code

nprofile1qqsvaup3fyr8ny3anszqh4c2pkvtsqcwpgaq2km6lxv2hkw79r5zeyspz3mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduq3qamnwvaz7tmwdaehgu3wwa5kuegpp4mhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mqrwzvjp

Publishing to

relay.damus.io

nostr.wine

nos.lol

Last Notes

2026-08-08 23:58:17 UTC

Well to my two lovely followers I'm going to delete this account now because I generated it on https://nostter.app (shout out to @SnowCait the dev!), which was a really fun platform to use nostr on and the community here was really fun to engage with, but by god is social media addictive and draining. I think I succeeded in preventing Luke from taking over Bitcoin. You are all welcome!

2026-08-08 23:42:13 UTC

- reply

I know you're joking but we actually live in a society where our elites rape and eat children and we shouldn't joke about until the Epstein clients hang from ropes

2026-08-08 23:32:33 UTC

- reply

Well if that fork ever comes my node will follow the chain with the hard cap and I doubt very much that will put me in the economic or energy minority!

2026-08-08 23:31:25 UTC

- reply

I'm not a bot, but at this point any of us could be AI, which is pretty disturbing. Your takes are too negative, nothing will stop legacy money power from having a foothold in an open competing system, but miners do not control bitcoin, they cannot force changes on the nodes, and the core devs do not control bitcoin, every update is voluntary. The BIP110 approach was reckless and it was rejected for good reason by a majority of nodes, economic actors, miners and devs. This is hardly proof positive of EpsteinCoreCoin

2026-08-08 23:21:13 UTC

- reply

Mining is strictly limited unlike fractional reserve / quantitative easing!

2026-08-08 23:17:17 UTC

- reply

https://fork.observer
It has forked but the latter is true too

2026-08-08 23:15:59 UTC

- reply

This take is so dumb. No bank can print Bitcoin, no bank can freeze Bitcoin, no bank can prevent privacy tools from being used, they cannot force updates or changes onto the nodes . . . bitcoin is fire yo stop being so negative!

2026-08-08 23:08:51 UTC

- reply

They call non jews cattle because Jews use the word goyim to refer to non-jews and human cattle is exactly what it means

2026-08-08 23:07:48 UTC

- reply

Modern Jews aren't Semites at all: they are turko/finn/khazars originally from Asia that concurred the region now around Ukraine and mass converted to the Torah and took hebrew letters for there asian language (yiddish) -- recently read a book: Facts are Facts available on archive.org

2026-08-08 22:49:50 UTC

- reply

It has forked, but in order to sell it the bippers have to get listed on an exchange, and it's difficult to transact on because it doesn't get any blocks and every transaction there is valid on main so splitting isn't trivial at all. So likely the tip is just orphaned and we don't get our bipper dividend

2026-08-08 22:38:59 UTC

- reply

So much effort goes into not forking for a reason...

2026-08-08 22:19:40 UTC

- reply

How many Christians died? What do you think of what has happened in Gaza the past three years? Do you see now fair the mainstream coverage of that massacre differs from what we get through alternative means? Monsters now but blameless victims back then?

2026-08-08 19:58:11 UTC

- reply

Hitler was a decorated soldier in a horrific war and blamed the problems of Germany (correctly) on Jewish cultural subversion and Jewish financial exploitation, and raised his people from economic desolation to a world power in a few short years of power!

2026-08-08 19:10:15 UTC

- reply

It's a damn shame how much this attack is hurting lightning!

2026-08-08 18:36:22 UTC

- reply

I assume it's not you in that 'we' that is risking hundreds of millions in hardware cost and electricity!

2026-08-08 16:27:51 UTC

- reply

False! Consensus is fragile! Even the same client across different environments could fork! You think of Bitcoin consensus and stability for granted but it is by no means inevitable!

2026-08-08 16:25:14 UTC

- reply

two weeks with 100% of network energy! How long with <3% energy anon?

2026-08-08 16:03:15 UTC

- reply

If an output is potentially spendable then it remains in the mempool of all the nodes. It is possible to construct transactions that follow BIP110 rules that put any amount of data into transactions as pubkeys of transactions so that arbitrary data not only is in the chain but is also in the (way more expensive) memory. That was the rational of removing the OP_RETURN limit: it is not possible to stop data from being stored in the chain and data in OP_RETURN is the best place to put it because it is unspendable and therefore not kept in memory!

2026-08-08 15:57:44 UTC

- reply

I think you may be projecting...

2026-08-08 15:55:25 UTC

- reply

I mean just spammed with transactions that put arbitrary data into the chain (and unlike OP_RETURN they will stack in the mempool)

2026-08-08 15:47:39 UTC

- reply

If the bip110 chain gets any blocks at all (which I highly doubt) it is going to get spammed so hard because it is possible to put any amount of data into bip110 compliant transactions (and many people have already coded this to show how pointless playing wack-a-mole with spam is. It's the miners who waste time/energy on the bip110 chain that will never get to 100 blocks in / never have an exchange to sell on! 33 more blocks before total capitulation. Are you really going to patch on a hardfork hash change and larp that you are the REAL Bitcoin!?

2026-08-08 15:39:38 UTC

- reply

https://bip110.orange.surf/live.html

2026-08-08 15:33:55 UTC

- reply

All older clients will follow the difficulty, as will the economic actors like exchanges, because that represents the security, irresponsibility and value of the system!

2026-08-08 15:32:24 UTC

- reply

Because a contentious fork without replay protection is a worst case scenario that puts people at risk and has only been avoided because of careful engineering and serious thought! Likely it won't actually fork because it won't get any blocks and rolling out a hash changing hardfork will probably make the bipper balk

2026-08-08 15:22:46 UTC

- reply

The only miners taking a big risk are those not mining on the most difficult known chaintip. So only miners running the bip110 code that throws out the most difficult tip are shooting themselves in the foot (likely zero miners will actually do this)

2026-08-07 19:33:24 UTC

- reply

Put your offer onto robosats and do it with escrow!
http://4t4jxmivv6uqej6xzx2jx3fxh75gtt65v3szjoqmc4ugdlhipzdat6yd.onion/ (this is TheBigLake exchange operator)

2026-08-07 19:31:27 UTC

- reply

If you operate your own channels this is false (?)

2026-08-07 19:16:55 UTC

- reply

Think it's meant to be used with rec only credentials, so those effected didn't enable a security feature (that maybe definitely should not be optional)

2026-08-07 19:13:25 UTC

- reply

oye vey, you are right but Pakistan / Turkey are much bigger fish

2026-08-07 19:06:26 UTC

- reply

I don't think Arabs are going to get allianced into mass murdering eachother like white people did last century...

2026-08-07 18:32:05 UTC

- reply

My god, look at those vaxtards in masks...

2026-08-07 17:56:47 UTC

- reply

Yes, protect yourself by running core 👍

2026-08-07 17:38:01 UTC

- reply

https://bip110.orange.surf/live.html

2026-08-07 17:24:38 UTC

- reply

He is wrong about the distinction between soft and hard fork: it is not inherently determined by the code change. Soft forks can only happen if the change has an energy / miner majority, because then the old clients will follow the energy and accept the rules. BIP110 throws out blocks the core clients accept! That is a hard fork!

2026-08-07 17:06:23 UTC

- reply

It's for accepting payments on your website directly to your node: it's a pretty polished payments process!

2026-08-07 16:58:50 UTC

- reply

Money is not a moral stance! It is an outcome of shared valuing (shared dilution). Good properties of Money will in theory produce a Good money. Blockchain has good properties of money, so it has potential to compete in the market of money use. Blockchain is not money: it is timestamped immutable data. You cannot invent a reality that doesn't exist! Data that looks like financial data is more costly to you as a node runner than OP_RETURN! A contentious hard fork with no replay protection is a way bigger problem than memes on the blockchain!

2026-08-07 16:48:55 UTC

- reply

too soon 😅

2026-08-07 16:42:05 UTC

- reply

Please add replay protection to your bip110 difficulty hardfork <3

2026-08-07 16:35:14 UTC

- reply

Yes in the middle of summer on Friday night all of the miners are going to capitulate to a small group of irresponsible extremists imposing a buggy pointless patch via moral supremacist brinkmanship . . .

2026-08-07 16:24:28 UTC

- reply

People are attacking BIP110 with increasing incivility because a contentious hard fork (a soft fork can only result if the change has miner majority) without replay protection is an unprecedented and dangerous situation that may hurt a lot of people. Core has stewarded this system for nearly twenty years carefully with great care and skill: do you think Bitcoins firm stability was inevitable because Satoshi had some divine moral purity. Distributed consensus is an experimental, unstable engineering system and BIP110 is three year old tantrum energy and it is threatening far more damage to this ecosystem then Saylor-Coinbase and other CIA/Mossad/Banker/Pedo scum ever could precisely because it is twisting this moral argument and dividing us.
You don't understand the engineering reality!
Blockspace is inherently valuable because it is immutable. As block reward drops, block space will be sold by miners because they earn the right to sell it with energy. Protocol cannot block that from happening because data can always be put into pubkeys, but data in pubkeys *could be spendable* so they stay in memory and cost the network much more. BIP110 is poorly designed, foolishly executed and absolutely a dangerous attack against bitcoin. Your sense of moral superiority in repugnant