nomadshiba⚡⚡

its me, you know

bip352 / silent payments: sp1qqf95gnrh453sncve4yal29zedxll3k48a0kcxhted66nnu5frcshwqmduw4x6a9ggvcmesah9qu32jx95ust635ng6xrd570mpu9hhmn7cpwpee5

https://npub.name

Public Key

npub1gkp4cdh5rktehjqjnqc09awey4302dpadlka6mes4fu5spes7fhqfsppqk

NIP-05 Address

[email protected]

Profile Code

nprofile1qqsytq6uxm6pm9umeqffsv8j7hvj2ch4xs7klmwaduc2572gquc0ymspr3mhxue69uhkummnw3ez6vp39eukz6mfdphkumn99e3k7mgpp4mhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mqy3kdj6

Publishing to

nostr-01.yakihonne.com

nos.lol

nostr.mom

relay.damus.io

t7fu7viea27nuvo5aklpylkvv723m67znnwjxpjmcpytpcpl6nyh2gid.onion

relay.primal.net

Author Public Key

npub1gkp4cdh5rktehjqjnqc09awey4302dpadlka6mes4fu5spes7fhqfsppqk

Show more details

Last Notes

2026-07-19 11:28:19 CEST

new ibz video dropped, i need some drinks
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6z6x4x9LOw

2026-07-19 11:09:30 CEST

- reply

so it happens, randomly. every time i fix it byte clearing the SSL cache and stuff from Brave/Chrome.
idk about the exact reason but it seems like certificate is lasting in cache longer than its expiration or something? idk weird.
if it happens again, i will try to log more info

2026-07-18 11:38:40 CEST

Taproot exploit should have been fixed from the day zero it has been discovered.
These days compilers give you errors if you have unreachable block of code.

2026-07-18 10:04:29 CEST

As Mechanic said WE DONT CARE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCKiGzGc_2Q

2026-07-18 08:56:45 CEST

https://youtu.be/q41OaKuR4Bs

2026-07-18 08:46:42 CEST

normies don't like conflict, and can't handle the reality.

2026-07-17 23:03:00 CEST

look at this, clean block, including the actual bitcoin txs only:
https://blossom.primal.net/d13260d37e489194c5d97982a6b64a7d91c0e3e44c085b70d4d581761bfd16f1.png

2026-07-17 22:33:07 CEST

- reply

also people are building things other than lightning as well.
im pretty sure we will figure out something, we just need the limitation.

2026-07-17 22:32:04 CEST

- reply

they would be low without discount to, there are no bitcoin txs on the blocks, blocks are empty if you ignore the spam

2026-07-17 22:30:55 CEST

i dont like talking about future things, or giving promises
BUT before this summer ends, i will share something cool with you all
probably

2026-07-17 22:19:28 CEST

Bitcoin is about cutting the power line of the parasites.
Changing your mindset.
It's not letting parasites wrap the Bitcoin, and let you use it only their wrapper.

2026-07-17 22:17:53 CEST

If you are running a Bitcoin Client
(im not gonna call it a node, because you are the node)
Then you might have noticed the slowdown after 2021.
You do realize we can't sustain that slowdown right?
We have to get rid of it.
It's a roadblock for true Bitcoin adoption.

2026-07-17 22:17:34 CEST

Are you a Bitcoin user?
"Yes i use Bitcoin."
What impl do you use?
"I don't run a node."
Then how are you a Bitcoin user?
You don't verify.
You don't interact with the network.
You might as well just use PayPal.
Everything what makes Bitcoin Bitcoin is out of the window.

2026-07-17 21:18:45 CEST

- reply

cost is already low, what about barrier of entry to being a true bitcoin user and running a node.
if you dont run your own node, none of it matters.
blocks are full because of spam rn, almost none are bitcoin txs.
and still cheap.
im all for 300KB blocks without discount.

2026-07-17 20:39:28 CEST

- reply

bitcoin is human made software, that you run.
if you cant run it, its not decentralized anymore.
you are comparing, understanding bitcoin to understanding nature or universe.

2026-07-17 19:29:38 CEST

- reply

sources:
https://github.com/JustVugg/colibri
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yBU41auQhw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mG4SmhWyeFA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qks6dGQFd_c

2026-07-17 19:29:26 CEST

- reply

its nice to see performance optimizations in the ai space.
feels like we will be able to run opus quality models on current home pc(s).
i have seen and tried very cool projects able to fit and run GLM5.2 on my laptop without worrying about memory space with decent speed (decent when you think about what you normally need to run the model)
deepseek also doing a lot advancements in the space.
when you combine all in same way, in 5-10 years maybe?
which would be cool.

2026-07-17 19:20:57 CEST

- reply

https://x.com/nomadshiba/status/2078167688208134487

2026-07-17 19:20:47 CEST

do you understand bitcoin?
https://blossom.primal.net/59d1773dc472484cb339880d427a8c6d7754fd7d92ab2323fb94e949e49052a6.png

2026-07-17 16:35:44 CEST

- reply

i have no idea who that is. and lighting doesn't have anything to do with witnesses discount

2026-07-17 14:53:57 CEST

if we didnt have segwit discount
timechain would have been only ~500GB rn.
instead its ~750GB (excluding the indexes and stuff that makes the chain data actually useful).
you wouldnt need a 2TB drive.
you would need less bandwidth as well.
less processing power too.
after taproot and spam, processing power requirements went even higher.
its funny how we are keep damaging the thing we should maximize and optimize for, which is making running a node easier.
bitcoin is the NODE you have. bitcoin doesnt live on the sky, you alone run all of bitcoin yourself. all of the ideas of bitcoin being decentralized are based on every user being a node.
if you are not using your own node you are not using bitcoin. you dont have to know how your node works, or be a nerd to run a node. bitcoin user by definition is a node. but its too complex, too user unfriendly. its almost like they dont want you to run your own instance of bitcoin.

2026-07-16 14:44:31 CEST

New @npub1wnl…n3wr Interview:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfMwHo18QzY

2026-07-15 19:53:27 CEST

coming back to a wip project in the middle of a complex logic rewrite after 10+ days is the worst.

2026-07-15 17:43:00 CEST

real
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAROpiUkF_U

2026-07-15 17:22:49 CEST

@nprofile…twc2 sometimes getting "Not secure" SSL errors on your web frontend.

2026-07-15 16:12:59 CEST

mimi is at it again
https://blossom.primal.net/b7c9d45919942944ec12184b26cde21bb38428f7ecbccfa8b0c0bfb0271f56d1.png

2026-07-14 16:38:13 CEST

- reply

well i dont see core any different people count doesnt matter, both are one entity, outputting one node software. dont get triggered by the title and the image, but this explain what i mean really well:
https://x.com/SatoshiSound/status/2073487446600298941
i see spam as issue sync slows down significantly after 2023 because of the processing needs.
running a bitcoin node should become easier overtime, not harder.
and i believe we are not done until node running as easy as installing a wallet app on your phone.
we have to get there, no matter what. bip110 is a step on the right direction. its the first softfork that is about helping node runners, not adding more features.

2026-07-14 16:20:18 CEST

- reply

how is that giving control over to "luke",
versions of nodes just exists, you choose to run it.
nobody is voting luke to be the maintainer of bitcoin.
if people like his client they run it.
if they like the upgrade they run it as well.
its a simple change, that reduces unnecessary data in some fields.
and removes unnecessary op codes from tapscript. its not rocket science.
a few lines of change, you can fit all of the changes in a single screen.
and its temporary, so if it breaks something we dont want it to break we can change it later, we dont have to hard fork of it back.

2026-07-14 07:17:18 CEST

- reply

once again, democracy is not decentralization.
just because there are "more devs" on core doesn't mean its decentralized, its the most centralized implementation of bitcoin. its not like you get more options from devs at core. there is still one core software. its an entity. that's not decentralization.
decentralization is you deciding what rules to enforce for your own copy of the timechain. and what to relay to others. its your property, its free speech. its free market. that's what bitcoin is and what makes it decentralized.
looking at an institution/organization like bitcoin core, and calling it decentralized is absurd. its the most centralized point of failure for bitcoin. one software.

2026-07-13 17:31:54 CEST

really worth listening
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRjzSb-gKm8

2026-07-13 16:28:45 CEST

- reply

you showed up in my yt recommendations today.

2026-07-13 16:21:59 CEST

- reply

do you have free space on your disk?
if so try to test disk health as well. llms can help for your specific system.

2026-07-13 11:57:08 CEST

- reply

its easier. i have been saying.
paying and accepting payment with bitcoin is significantly easier.

2026-07-13 11:45:47 CEST

- reply

funny

2026-07-13 11:39:35 CEST

summer is OVERRATED

2026-07-13 05:11:17 CEST

they turned node running into a niche nerd thing to do.
but each bitcoin user suppose to be a node runner, each node supposed to be a bitcoin user.
but they are still designing node software for servers.
bip110 is the first softfork that does something good for the node runners.
this all becomes controversial because of the lack of node runners, if we had each bitcoin user running full node for everything bitcoin. then we would have easier time doing softforks that makes node running easier.
the ideal state of node running would be, everyone having one on their phone.

2026-07-12 22:33:31 CEST

stop taking your meds

2026-07-12 17:16:46 CEST

Reduced Data Temporary Softfork
is not
Spam filtering Softfork

2026-07-11 05:16:28 CEST

- reply

bip110 is not a filter

2026-07-11 04:42:20 CEST

- reply

bip110 is not a filter

2026-07-10 15:41:48 CEST

people who are against BIP10, and still following Saylor after what he has become, seem to have thrown the logic out of the window for their expired heros.
they are blinded by their unquestioned loyalty to the corrupt. can't see the risks, the attacks.
these people attracted to brands, they are attracted to the brand of bitcoin, not what its. they don't care about preserving it.
they are attracted to the brand of their heros, who has just become corrupt bad actors. but they still follow them because of what they were once. they are attracted to the brand.
they never understood bitcoin and picked. they were just attracted to the brand, the name.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WouciSjNOIo

2026-07-10 03:13:13 CEST

- reply

i hope in the later years we can remove witness discount, and also lower block size limit to 300kb.

2026-07-09 09:34:08 CEST

- reply

i just woke up today and thought:
maybe you can try glass shaped candy?

2026-07-07 13:18:59 CEST

- reply

no i don't

2026-07-07 04:35:48 CEST

everytime something good comes up, and i trust the devs, they get captured or something idk, and the project loses its way and turns to shit.
then i add another project i wanna make an maintain to my bucket list.
like everytime i go like, omg finally someone did this this way. then it gets popular, and they suddenly forget what made them different. project turns to shit.
that's why i hate organizations, people in charge changes, and then the projects does 180. that's why i like it when only a single person is in charge deciding what should get in or not. this way at least, the project doesn't lose its identity because people in charge changes. you get what you signed up for.

2026-07-05 14:55:05 CEST

- reply

https://bip110.org ???

2026-07-04 01:07:13 CEST

yt removed dislike from shorts (on the clients) and yt shorts instantly turned into even more shit. retarded ass, shit content. retarded shit general filler normie population watches probably, retarded ass ideas, ai slop, shitty content i don't care about.
fuck this shit. wish everyone i subscribed to was publishing on nostr videos...

2026-07-03 17:16:47 CEST

- reply

@nprofile…twc2
your web app is turning youtube channel links into video embeds.

2026-07-03 17:16:05 CEST

gold mine of a channel:
https://www.youtube.com/@SQUAREDEYESgaming

2026-07-03 11:17:13 CEST

- reply

https://bip110.org/

2026-07-02 12:57:47 CEST

- reply

yakihonne is cool, showing you when it fails, letting you retry too

2026-07-02 10:09:00 CEST

- reply

GM, true

2026-07-01 13:49:10 CEST

last month i realized bitcoin is using
1000 base for MB, instead of 1024...
(wtf satoshi)
anyway at least its less space then i first thought.
so im officially adopting MiB is 1024, and MB is 1000 idea now.

2026-07-01 13:22:39 CEST

- reply

i was trying to open up space on the disk for full sync testing my bitcoin node impl

2026-07-01 13:21:43 CEST

few weeks ago i realized steam desktop app's chromium engine had +200GiB worth of logs.
a single +200GiB log file...

2026-06-30 06:58:33 CEST

- reply

you dont have to click agree

2026-06-30 06:57:15 CEST

- reply

is it water, or chemicals tho?

2026-06-27 07:23:51 CEST

GM
had some good fun dream

2026-06-26 10:58:06 CEST

- reply

sarcasm?

2026-06-26 08:15:39 CEST

"great" software, maintained by really "smart" people, trying to sync 2 days of txs for almost an hour.
https://blossom.primal.net/a232619be90e23cb59b4818f44ad96cc481bf39fd24b053bc3667f2ba9c3a852.jpg

2026-06-26 07:58:33 CEST

ah yes, waiting for 2 days to sync somehow for half an hour
https://blossom.primal.net/8a648def1d56414994dc86757bca3c8e4e4e5c7015658c85543707f30db3d66a.png

2026-06-25 14:50:02 CEST

i now hate bitcoin finance and trader people.
"OH I INVEST IT BITCOIN, MAKING PROFITS"
all they talk is price, investing.
they didn't change their world view, they didn't change what is money for them. their brain still works in the initial fiat wiring. they didn't spend time to rewire it to understand, bitcoin values, traditions, culture, history.
most of them just hold paper bitcoins. its no different than another investment product for them.
they don't run a node. they don't have an itch to spend their money in bitcoin. they are not excited about the revolution. they are excited about dollar number going up. if they build around bitcoin its to profit from it, not help it.
idk.
and worse when people hear you are holding bitcoin, they think about you in that light, like you are doing crypto, and talking about price all day. and gains.
they are fake bitcoiners. they just have paper bitcoin. they are not bitcoiners.
bitcoiners practice bitcoinism in their everyday life, in every opportunity.

2026-06-21 20:33:02 CEST

https://youtube.com/watch?v=nftVYlIe1ok

2026-06-18 22:01:29 CEST

- reply

bip110 is bitcoin, everything else chose to split, not bip110.

2026-06-18 17:54:32 CEST

- reply

https://blossom.primal.net/691482974b5ba8ccc16ae8f0aee590936226b283fb0e5b319056f3e1fbc5e745.mp4

2026-06-15 16:41:42 CEST

why bitcoin is decentralized?
because everybody holds a copy of the ledger themselves.
do you have copy of the ledger?
no.
then you don't know if you have bitcoin.

2026-06-09 16:38:22 CEST

- reply

also xmr has infinite block size

2026-06-09 16:30:30 CEST

- reply

also i think you dont have DM inbox relays.
you can try yakihonne

2026-06-09 15:54:00 CEST

did you ever wonder, why you can't understand how claims of some shitcoins actually work?
its not because they are too complex. they are actually too simple to understand, not complex at all, but you cant wrap your head around it because its all marketing and the actual thing doesnt do what they claim it does.

2026-06-09 15:20:53 CEST

- reply

did you get my reply in the dms?

2026-06-09 14:46:30 CEST

when i say "bitcoin must stay small and slow"
shitcoiners, big block heads, and multi block heads understand it as "bitcoin must be clunky", instead of "bitcoin must stay lean, smooth, and efficient"
they are not capable of understanding the elegancy of scaling with layers. they can't think about a small efficient copy of global ledger that lives in everyone's pockets.
a ledger that only keeps the most important final truths everyone in the world has to know and at same time.

2026-06-09 07:22:15 CEST

- reply

hey @nprofile…s6gp throw a dm

2026-06-08 23:40:50 CEST

- reply

you didnt give any reasons, made up arguments. its ok to not know things, you dont have to try hard to appear correct.
you are constantly lying about how kaspa works and its cryptography, using meaningless jargon to appear more qualified or feel better.
read the whole thread.
if you are gonna support kaspa at least learn how it actually works.
https://blossom.primal.net/25e75bffef2b8d71f0b19f66e979d9c367eeb55482e0e4323996fd81d4e0c5b8.jpg

2026-06-08 22:28:37 CEST

- reply

Same low iq energy as:
"Oh if ethereum security is just an illusion. Go attack it. You can't"

2026-06-08 21:59:52 CEST

turns out i was right.
it really is a delusion of a solution.
#nevent1q…v24m

2026-06-08 16:46:53 CEST

- reply

you dont seem to understand my point.
you are still thinking about a decentralized network where one "bad guy" does something out of the ordinary.
thats not about that, thats about how much you can resist "official" change. the decentralization aspect.
i already mentioned your point here:
> only way you can reject it meaningfully is you are online at that time, and see the invalid (for you) tx. and out right deny the utxo set.
you make most pow the valid chain (pre-pruned), as long as miners wants a change, that change happens.
once it happens no fresh node even with an older version rejects that chain. you just ride along.
again `utxo_commitment⁠` doesnt prove the specific script was following your ruleset. it only proves utxo set was valid, and seen as valid and has been built on top of it in the past by others. not you. call it what its, which is trusting the collective, social consensus with pow.
you can accept trade offs and say, "yeah i think kaspa does enough" but you dont do that. you insist that utxo_commitment⁠ and pow means verification of past txs some how.
you even admit 51% attack could create invalid utxo for your ruleset. thats the definition of utxo_commitment⁠ cant verify tx was following your ruleset back then. it means there is consensus and work done to accept that history no matter it fits into your rules or not. that's compliance not verification.
another example if you do a temporary hard fork that get deactivated a while later, even the freshly running old version nodes follows the hard fork chain after it deactivates.
its a really simple question:
Q: Do you know every TX before you is following YOUR RULES
A: No
but you keep arguing that "no i can verify", that's just wrong, you can only trust network in large says its good.
you didnt even answered bandwidth point, even if you are are pruning you still download. and with the goal of 100bps that looks even worse. do you think someone's laptop sync with every tx ever worldwide without hogging some stuff?
you also didnt answer periodic "smooth" hardfork activations kaspa has. thats not decentralization, thats a realase schedule of dev team. everybody complies to updates. node impls auto update.
you can't know if history was valid, you just know history has big support.
when i first asked "do you run kaspa" and you said "yes", you were wrong. you dont run kaspa. you listen to the kaspa network. illusion of a node running. if you were running it you would run it from the genesis. yes you can reject blocks as long as you are live. but unlike a bitcoin node you just accept what came before you. you TRUST others before you acted the way you hopped they would act.

2026-06-08 13:03:37 CEST

- reply

proof of consensus != proof of enforcement
also maybe you cant understand it but "L1 should be slow" isn't dogma. it's the cost of letting anyone verify without permission. you can disagree with the tradeoff, but you didn't solve anything. everything works the same its 1+1=2 its the reality of the universe. you love using words like "thermodynamic" so much, its not so hard to understand. its not a bitcoin thing, its any system ever.
you started a new kaspa node fresh:
- downloads the pruning point proof (just headers, not full blocks)
- checks PoW on those headers (only for ordering/consensus, not verifying the txs inside them)
- checks ghostdag structure + blue work (only picks the heaviest proof, says nothing about tx validity)
- downloads the UTXO set from an untrusted peer (the list of who owns what, streamed to you in chunks)
- hashes that set with muhash, compares it to the `utxo_commitment` field in the header (only confirms the set matches a number a miner wrote into the header)
- validates txs in the pruning point block only (that single block, against the set it was just handed)
- everything before the pruning point: never executed (no scripts run, no signatures checked, data never even downloaded)
what verifies what:
- PoW: energy was spent on the headers
- ghostdag/blue work: this proof is heavier than competing ones
- muhash check: the set you received matches a number in the header
- nothing: that the number was produced by valid txs following the rules
the `utxo_commitment` is just a value in a header. the node confirms "the set i got matches this value." it never confirms "this value came from valid execution." consistency, not correctness.
proof of consensus, not proof of enforcement.
nodes will rejectrt `utxo_commitment` if:
- a utxo set that doesnt hash to the value in the header, meaning someone hands you a snapshot thats been tampered with after the fact. the hashes won't match. rejected
- the only thing that breaks the check is a mismatch between the bytes you received and the committed hash. basically checksum.
- only way you can reject it meaningfully is you are online at that time, and see the invalid (for you) tx. and out right deny the utxo set.
`utxo_commitment` doesnt enforce that the transactions which produced that utxo set were valid. its generated by the miner who mined that block. if devs pushes an update and miners mine based on it during a period. and days pass. you have no idea if it fits your ruleset or not. you just accept it because its the most pow.
a fresh node goes:
does my downloaded set match this hash? Yes. Accepted.
it has no way to know the set contains coins that should never have existed.
the `utxo_commitment` proves the set matches what was committed.
it does not prove what was committed was legitimate by your rules.
it catches tampering with the snapshot, not "fraud" or period of rule change baked into the history, deep enough.
its trusting the work, not verification. and assuming the bandwidth a kaspa node spends, you cant have a lot of nodes that you cant easily find one that is telling you to double check that older block. if you can find a copy of the said block of course. assuming only few big cloud runners will be running a full node soon.
source: https://github.com/kaspanet/rusty-kaspa

2026-06-07 23:53:49 CEST

- reply

"Trust the 'Science'. Even thought I don't get it fully. Because it sounds sciency~"
"Just trying to prove myself right any means necessary, mentioning things that doesn't even exist in Kaspa"
You just hear some stuff that you dont fully understand and, go "oh so thats why" *clueless*.
THE mAth doesnt "prove" what you think it proves... Or you dont know what is suppose to be proving.
you think you have some cool new solution while mentioning 40 years old papers.
kaspa literally doesn't use zero knowledge proofs.
it uses muhash commitments and sampled headers. which is a hash of a set. it commits to what the set is, not to how the set was derived.
even if it did, zk proofs require a prover. someone generates the proof.
bitcoin doesn't need a prover. i am the prover. i run the computation myself from genesis.
you invoked zk proofs to sound technical. but kaspa doesn't even have them. and even if it did, it wouldn't solve the "valid by whose rules" problem. it would just move the trust to whoever generated the proof.
you don't even know what the scripts are.... as a newcomer node.
https://medium.com/@jcroger/why-archive-nodes-are-no-longer-essential-the-kaspa-proof-f15d3b64d24a
> While you can’t prove cryptographically that pre-pruning history is valid once it’s dropped, **social consensus** ensures that if deceit happened, at least one honest node would have detected it and preserved proof. This hybrid model guarantees consistency
https://hashdag.github.io/blog/syncing
> The primary goal of consensus systems is **facilitating agreement, not enforcing consistency**. And if the economic majority happens to follow and maintain a ledger to which an invalid transaction entered at some point in history, so be it,
> Kaspa nodes prune block data by default, and new nodes by default do not request historical data, rather, they **sync in SPV mode**, i.e., by downloading and verifying only block headers.
kaspa is just the other side of the bcash coin. "fuck verifying txs, we will just have lots of txs"
honestly im tried of all "lets make L1 fast" "solutions". L1 suppose to be slow and small.
stop trying to walk around it.

2026-06-07 20:59:42 CEST

- reply

also no. you cant assume tx fits to your rules because of a "proof".
that would be the best compression ever created.
you are losing information.
its impossible.
as i said in the beginning "delusion of a solution"

2026-06-07 20:57:25 CEST

- reply

you are still thinking about someone breaking rules. not rule changes.

2026-06-07 18:58:44 CEST

- reply

there is no way you can know if someone rejected something in isolation at some point.
the commitment proves the utxo set is consistent with the history that was accepted. it doesn't prove that history was valid by your rules.
those are different things.
you still cant verify what script ran, how.
the commitment proves "this utxo set is the result of this history"
it does not prove "this history followed the rules you would have enforced"
"this utxo is valid", valid by whose rules?

2026-06-07 16:12:30 CEST

- reply

> that block would be rejected by every node online at that moment.
you are saying it yourself here "at that moment".
what rejecting a change proposed by the kaspa devs looks like? what happens if miners support the change but you don't.
also nothing blindly trusts PoW.
but with default kaspa node if software rules changed at some point for a while you would have no idea because you dont replay those txs. you just trust what the network tells you the utxo is.
if a chain has 2x of pow of your current chain in bitcoin, but has a single tx that doesn't fit into your ruleset, you wouldn't pick that chain.
but with kaspa you have no idea that happened. you either have to always online to catch it, or run and verify every tx from the genesis.
you can only prove everyone on the network agreed that valid utxo set looked like "this" at some point.
no matter how many tricks, ideas you have not to verify txs one by one for real. none is actual verification of the tx.
that's trust, not verification.
you cannot meaningfully prove anything about the past.
have fun complying to another hard-fork that activates "smoothly"

2026-06-07 13:29:19 CEST

- reply

you get the utxo from from the snapshot.
you dont verify anything to that point.
you trust pow. that's almsot exactly like spv behavior.
if a bitcoin node sees an invalid tx they blacklist that block hash because the whole block is invalid.
you can't build on invalid tx. is that so hard to understand?
you can't just download a utxo set and call it verified just because it was timestamped in the DAG/chain.
you dont even know if the chain you are on is valid.
you just pick what ever has the most pow.
because you can't verify a tx from one week ago.
you trust the utxoset your are given.
be honest with yourself.
you are claiming things that are not real. be real.

2026-06-07 12:05:55 CEST

- reply

me, running and mining, like satoshi intended

2026-06-07 12:04:54 CEST

- reply

This dude mining with 4EH/s just found 2 blocks in the last 24 hours!
#nevent1q…4jay
https://ocean.xyz/stats/bc1q3595j3lnu4ywus85p5369tq3j983fqa786p3sq

2026-06-07 09:01:58 CEST

- reply

that's exactly what i said.
i also don't like bitcoin pruned nodes but they will at a least replay everything from the genesis. kaspa will just trust the PoW as if it verifies the txs somehow. that's very similar to a bitcoin spv node.
you said it yourself, you are using PoW as a trust mechanism to pick the chain, you are not validating blocks older than utxoset snapshot. you have no idea what older txs are, you are not validating that. you have no power to go "ah this old tx makes no sense, let's blacklist this block and find another chain without it". miners and full nodes control your chain/DAG. you trust the PoW, you dont verify. that's literally a SPV node.
and starting from utxoset snapshot is not a cool feature of kaspa that's just sacrificing verification for faster IDB. why? because you produce 10blocks per seconds right now. no normal user can sync that. its terabytes of data even now.
bitcoin limits block size and time on purpose to keep the chain small. because its the global state that every bitcoin user has to verify and sync with. then we have things like lightning, ark or others that create isolated states where not everyone has to sync with. that's how scaling works in any system, not just bitcoin.
your design sacrifices sovereignty, decentralization, and verification in favor of blocks-per-second.
#naddr1qq…lzae
and i said the node you linked only connects to 9 nodes because again a normal home hardware and internet can't handle 10 blocks per second i guess. how much bandwidth does that thing spent that you/they had to lower the node count to only 9?
why not 50 nodes?
you say you are running kaspa, but all you have is a pruned SPV client with ✨DAG✨. by desig kaspa is controlled by the miners and "archival" full nodes. you dont have a power to say "no". because you trust pow, don't verify.

2026-06-06 23:28:35 CEST

- reply

every cycle its the same always, we expect it, it happens, nothing new.

2026-06-06 21:44:05 CEST

- reply

that's cool.

2026-06-06 21:43:12 CEST

- reply

i mean maybe we find other options, lightning not forever, but the best thing we have atm

2026-06-06 21:29:15 CEST

Bitcoin is sovereignty first.
Everything else is high TPS first.

2026-06-06 21:21:24 CEST

- reply

that's not running kaspa, it just a peeking node/relay.
so you're trusting a handful of full real nodes for the entire history of the chain, since your pruned node doesn't replay anything.
it just accepts a UTXO snapshot. if those archival nodes lie, you can't detect it if you weren't listening during that time.
and if the ~317 node operators wanted to change the rules, what stops them? you just had a hard fork last month that the whole community "smoothly" complied with, and the installer you linked auto-updates itself. that's not a decentralized consensus, that's a dev team with a release schedule.
also curious what the bandwidth looks like at 100 bps, since you're already throttled to 9 peers just to make 10 bps manageable on normal hardware.
it sounds like another high-throughput-first crypto project, but with the illusion of node running.

2026-06-06 19:33:30 CEST

- reply

you sound like a kaspa user, are you running the kaspa on your computer?

2026-06-06 17:08:31 CEST

if you really want yield on your bitcoin, dont play finance games.
just rent some cheap hashrate and start mining.

2026-06-06 09:22:05 CEST

- reply

are you running kaspa?

2026-06-05 09:36:28 CEST

people play with all kinds of bitcoin, crypto, and fiat games, but can't just buy bitcoin.
then they complain about the state they are in.

2026-06-04 14:12:22 CEST

- reply

as always take the ideas, dont make heros.

2026-06-04 13:49:06 CEST

- reply

OMG LOOK AT ALL THESE PROFITABLE HASHRATE UNDER THE HASH VALUE, GO RENT IT.
https://blossom.primal.net/c42a579b2e8b3b775c05cec86f63e94372e101d032de4ad2d2a802853cc9ec1e.mp4
#naddr1qv…7rzv
#naddr1qv…89ss

2026-06-04 13:31:56 CEST

you guys code to get employed?
i have nothing against people but.
people "learning to code" to get employed somewhere tires me so much.
when we used to talk about programming it was about building things, optimizing things, ideas, discovering new ways etc.
now if you mention programming people are like of yeah the job title: programmer. i mean i work but that came later. i work because i know it, and i need money. i dont code because i need money. i code because i gotta build.
if i had a lot of money, i would be coding more.

2026-06-04 13:14:58 CEST

clients should warn people about non-blossom uploads.
they can be tampered with, cant be verified. (unless they have the file hash in the event itself as well, i dont remember the nip)
i know many people use non-blossom cdns, but thats the points. the warning should scream to their face.

2026-06-04 13:06:52 CEST

- reply

yup thats the issue, you are using a blossom server, but its not in your blossom server list.
so probably clients are treating it as just another cdn. doesnt verify it.
this also means when you upload it, you dont have mirrors of it on other blossom servers.
https://blossom.primal.net/2843c145008363f280d68eb16c80a9352d704a100908b68ef98768b1ee47909b.png