Luke Dashjr
fdd5e8…3464a7Roman #Catholic, husband, father of 11 children, #Bitcoin Core developer, and CTO @npub1qtvl2em0llpnnllffhat8zltugwwz97x79gfmxfz4qk52n6zpk3qq87dze ; INTP; I condemn fake "Catholics", cryptobros & pedos; see full bio
luke_nostr@dashjr.org
Followers
2.5k
Following
0
Notes indexed
220
Latest notes
/v1/events?pubkey=fdd5e8f6ae0db817be0b71da20498c1806968d8a6459559c249f322fa73464a7Just keep pretending consensus rules are the only rules and hope people believe you? Idk why you would expect that to fool me
The other restrictions prevent the same issue. OP_RETURN is not the only contiguous region that can be abused. There is no "different issue" addressed by RDTS. There's also no evidence an OP_RETURN-only variant would get more support, and someone even proposed that a while back and effectively proved it doesn't. This has only just become an attack vector 4 months ago with the release of Core30. And reversing that harm is the only thing RDTS accomplishes.
1) The RDTS limit is 256 _bytes_, not kilobytes. 2) Those are unjust laws, and people should fight them. 3) That being said, 3D files still don't belong on Bitcoin, and fear of unjust prosecution would likely still be fatal to Bitcoin in this way.
It takes time to think through, implement, and review a more complicated long term change. In that time, anyone can just destroy Bitcoin irreversibly. RDTS protects Bitcoin while we do that longer term R&D
No, it acknowledges BitVM issues are a tradeoff and that is part of why it expires in a year. BitVM is unlikely to be ready for production within a year anyway.
60% is what recent data shows. Feel free to do your own analysis.
There's ways to do it, but the spammers _want_ to force you to download and distribute it, so they intentionally use the harmful ways.
If you oppose preventing CSAM, you objectively do support CSAM. It's only hostile to pedophiles and scammers.
It doesn't, this is just the latest Epstein narrative being parroted over and over to try to brainwash people.












