Nostr Archives

The only consistent people in #bitcoin are the people who have been trying to keep node operation as light as possible & limit data costs so that the network will remain decentralized & censorship proof. They were demonized as "small blockers" during the blocksize war & they are demonized for being pro filter "knotzies" now, but they are right.

💬 85 replies

Replies (50)

Hanshan24d ago

obviously i have been buying monero for years. and yes, theres a decent argument for the "hijacked" framing the situation. I'm sympathetic that people want an SOV to store their wealth, I do to. but abstracting Bitcoin into higher layers that are inevitably more centralized and kissing Wall Street ass for NGU is a guarantee of regulatory capture. user utility has to be the fundamental use case.

0000 sats

Meyer24d ago

You complain so much about usability when there are plenty of people on here that use bitcoin daily without any issue… Bitcoin is our only chance to fix the money and it may require monero. Many of us on here have indicated multiple times that we have no issue with monero but just have no interest or need to use it. Monero bros are insufferable though Meanwhile you are out here spreading Roger ver’s bullshit…

0000 sats

Hanshan24d ago

The only person mentioning Monero in this thread is you. so afaict your argument is " Bitcoin works just fine for me. we should just ossify here. " which is a valid opinion people can have.

0000 sats

Hanshan22d ago

hilarious you reopening the conversation two days later just to tell somebody to shut up 😂 you know you can just say nothing right?

0000 sats

HHofer9922d ago

You need to hear it again. Shut the fuck up.

0000 sats

Hanshan22d ago

make a point or seethe harder bro 😂

0000 sats

Tauri21d ago

The answer is yes on both counts

0000 sats

Scrotus21d ago

That's when ya lost

0000 sats

Tauri21d ago

Are you sure buddy? https://blockspaceweekly.substack.com/p/issue-3-three-yea…

0000 sats

Scrotus21d ago

0000 sats

Tauri21d ago

That would have been true if 90% of the network didn’t run on defaults. Practice wins over theory every time.

0000 sats

Aaron van Wirdum21d ago

If 90% of the network runs on defaults that is because 90% of users voluntarily decide to do that.

0000 sats

zaytun21d ago

What are you running?

0000 sats

Tauri21d ago

You’re asking two different questions. OP_Return doesn’t bloat the UTXO set, but it definitely results in more data added to the disk as a result of relaxing the filter.

0000 sats

Jeff Swann16d ago

But the devs (& people supporting their top down changes) are mad that a significant portion of the network is choosing a competitive client that keeps the user controls... If this is an open network where users get to choose direction, why all the hate?

0000 sats

Aaron van Wirdum16d ago

Bitcoin Core developers have explicitly said users are free to run different software: https://bitcoincore.org/en/2025/06/06/relay-statement/ What people like myself are sick of are the lies and deceptive rhetoric around all of this, and the toxic environment it creates.

0000 sats

Meyer24d ago

You have to be kidding me, right? Go re-read the first line to your response to my post where there was zero mention of monero. You were the one who referenced monero not me sir. The fact that you did not even realize it exhibits your cognitive dissonance and obsession with pushing your privacy shitcoin while undermining bitcoin

0000 sats

Hanshan24d ago

sigh ok man your right, i said "monero" first the point was, *you're the one dragging other coins into the conversation. a conversation about Bitcoin trade-offs. it wasn't like I was just looking for the opportunity to talk about it, YOU brought it up.

0000 sats

Tauri21d ago

This great guy has you covered on this issue as well: https://blockspaceweekly.substack.com/p/issue-4-the-block…

0000 sats

Tauri21d ago

And by the way that extra 36% of additional blockspace has eared miners less than 1% additional fee revenue on average. I hope you can see the problem eventually.

0000 sats

Scrotus21d ago

Empty blocks are a good thing? (Because they presumably save neglagable amount of disk space apparently) That's the hill you want to die on? Good luck with that. And have fun with your appeal to authority, I'd love to have your own thoughts but if that's too much to ask... Please send me another piece of ai slop- fud

0000 sats

Tauri21d ago

Of course, this bug is a feature. 🙄 Come back to the real world you wanker. If you run on defaults, you haven’t decided anything. Someone made the choice for you.

0000 sats

Aaron van Wirdum21d ago

What if I think the default is the best option?

0000 sats

Tauri21d ago

You can hold wrong opinions and still have to pay the opportunity cost. Or vice versa.

0000 sats

dvo16d ago

open source and freedom to choose what we run is the reason any of this works. I'm just still a little confused why core v30 with raising the op_return limit was pushed so hard and immediately for release. seems like all it did was create disagreement

0000 sats

Iihsotas16d ago

Your node, your software. It’s open code you can change the relay policy all you want. Core removed default relays that in their view were causing miner centralization as large miners were being given an unfair advantage. You are free to ignore that concern.

0000 sats

Meyer24d ago

Do you even believe your own bullshit at this point? 🤣 You claimed bitcoin was hijacked…you weren’t just “discussing bitcoin trade-offs” I suggested you buy the coin that you think is not hijacked instead of continuing to shit on bitcoin

0000 sats

Meyer24d ago

And I do not believe bitcoin should ossify but also do not think there is any rush to make drastic changes anytime soon. Meanwhile you consistently claim bitcoin is failing or has already failed or was hijacked which is blatantly incorrect You are arguing that bitcoin failed because it didn’t increase its block size…it did actually increase block size since inception so you are wrong there and I maybe would have a different opinion if blocks were actually full and the mempool wasn’t a ghost town. Same reason I think the knots people are not serious when they complain about spam when bitcoin has a mechanism to fight spam already (I.e., the fee market)

000

Tauri21d ago

Tell me you didn’t read the article without telling me. Blocks are never “empty” unless in the rare cases where a miner mines an empty block. Also blocks have been consistently above 1.2MB full since 2017. They didn’t need a security bailout from spammers. On the other matter, this guy is no authority by any stretch of the imagination. He’s a data analyst and currently it’s practically unknown. I just happen to like his humble and concise way of explaining and thought you might learn something from him too. Spam is a nuanced topic that requires much research to properly understand. I’ve been going through this rabbit hole for 3 years straight. Have you? Maybe if you didn’t have a knee jerk reaction to it, you would think differently. Questioning your biases is a sign of greater intelligence. But it’s painful initially.

0000 sats

Scrotus21d ago

It's just matter of semantics. It's true that "not full" does not equal "empty" but I'm pretty sure we both know that... But that does not change the fact that you are claiming a trivial amount of data that is saved by having "not full" blocks justifies all you active measures... But you do you. And the fact that you spent 3 years learning about this and you still think your farcical non solutions is a good idea and that it is going to achieve any sort of consensus is just sad.

0000 sats

Hanshan24d ago

I didn't say any of that stuff, but have fun arguing with yourself I guess.

0000 sats

Hanshan24d ago

except for the "Bitcoin is failing" part I'm DEFINITELY saying that.

0000 sats

Meyer24d ago

Why is bitcoin failing? Pretty sure one of your arguments is spreading Roger ver’s bullshit that bitcoin got hijacked and we need to increase block size lol

0000 sats

Hanshan24d ago

what happened is that the small block narrative took hold, the narrative that you and every maxi for the last many years are so intense about promoting, and everybody pushed to move actual transactions to lightning and so now yes, we don't need a block size increase. because nobody uses Bitcoin. and saying so is certainly " discussing Bitcoin trade-offs " The trade-offs of spending the last many years intentionally constricting L1 size, shitty UX and instead promoting usage as an institutional SOV.

0000 sats

Tauri21d ago

> trivial amount of data that is saved 36% on average is trivial in your dictionary? Have you been reading Greg Maxwell by any chance? If yes, then you’re getting your data from dishonest sources. Anyway, what I think is mostly irrelevant. In 6 months or less we’ll know who was right.

0000 sats