This post sponsored by Citrea. Rug the spammers.

King shit

You can afford to lose a bitcoin or two unlike those of us who haven't sold our souls. I'm sure you got a nice bonus for doing Citrea's bidding. 📝 7c3c9606…

"LA LA LA LA LA, I CANT HEAR YOU" -SLOPP

Centralized vs. Decentralized. Learn the difference.

BIP-110 Welcome.

Censorship on chain level – Who gets to define "spam"? Breaks Bitcoin's core neutrality & permissionless ethos. No content-policing in the base layer. UASF chain-split risk – Tiny signaling (~2-3% nodes), forced activation = 2017-style fork war redux. Economic suicide for noobs & hodlers. Slippery slope to protocol capture – Ban inscriptions today, privacy coins or "bad" txs tomorrow. Turns sound money into politicized shitcoin ruleset.

"Time to put the ‘bit’ in Bitcoin 💥🪙"

Who was claiming that “Bitcoin Core v30 was going to result in a massive node crash / network outage”? It seems like you offered a bet that nobody would reasonably take and now claim it means people were wrong about something vaguely related. Instead, can you please explain the rationale for the Core v30 changes to OP_RETURN and why they are beneficial for Bitcoin as money? I still have not heard a single rational explanation for that change.

For those reading the thread (because you obviously already understand this - and that’s why you keep pushing it), 1 BTC for you is far less of a commitment than 1 BTC for many other people. That’s if the bet makes sense. I’m not sure this bet even makes sense. I think the issue people are raising is that spam is bad and that we should discourage spam. Your response should also be that spam is bad - but you refuse to say that, so people reasonably conclude that you have a financial interest in spamming the Bitcoin blockchain. We can define spam as non-monetary use of Bitcoin - then legitimately argue about how to identify that via dust outputs etc… We should also agree that fighting spam is not really hard (it’s tedious, but not difficult from a technical perspective. Knots has some very simple spam filters Core could adopt - that would need to be periodically updated as spammers change tactics).

🤣🤣🤣🤣

I don't need to gamble to show my conviction. I just need to run my node. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dYA9vYa0iwQ

Man, I have been looking for a single BIP‑110 promoter who doesn’t consider it a shitfork for over 3 months. I’m willing to swap smaller amounts via a trustless (on‑chain) multisig. It turns out, they’re all full of shit liars who push others towards a fork that they don’t believe will succeed.

Not taking the word of a dishonest shitcoiner. "Ohh you can afford to gamble hundred thousand dollars on some retarded nonsense where I'm going to scam you? Ohh you don't have convictions" Most retarded argument I've seen from lopp so far

The rat thinks there's going to be a fork 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

What would a narc do? Marketing via virtue signaling—a twofer.

I run a node on a mini-PC and a 2T SSD. I'll upgrade when it's time but for now it's amply sufficient. I take the under that spamers will be filtered out by proof of work as was originally intended.

I am very picky on which games I "put my skin". I am using multiple tools and resources to judge the pros and cons of spam tolerance on Bitcoin. Your coding expertise and( hats off !) your pre eth/shitcoin involvement have been great but now they aren't enough to convince me to tolerate spam. Your "skin" comes from $30/BTC and mine comes from a much more expensive one. If "skin" is measured with how much of your sacrifice you put to get that amount of BTC the ratio of " skin" should be different. If you're so convinced that you're right go and debate with many of those who you're avoiding continuously by putting the right "skin in the game" ratio.

So to be clear, knots didn't workout for him, so bip110 was created as well/instead?

I doubt your target audience has 1btc to wager.

I love the idea of pre-30 Bitcoin nodes living forever now. If there are crucial soft forks in the future, but they're built on post 30 or knots, I just won't run them. Bitcoin devs cooked themselves on both sides in this debacle.

@Asanoha I'm told you have expressed interest in this wager, what say you?

Well, as you say in your own blogpost there is indeed a high probability of chainsplitting. Maybe you like “spewing nonsense” on your blog? With no replay protection for transactions with spam, of course, as they’re the target of the filter. But I don’t see why a transaction that does not use any known exploit for data storage couldn’t be in both chains in the case of a split.

I heard that's why his lazer eyes are blue.... because he's a shitcoiner... heh heh heh 😏