reply on: Influencers out in Storm: Is *This* the Hill to Die On? \ stacker news ~bitcoin

pull down to refresh

There are lots of these

The only one that doesn't belong in your list is Jimmy's. It's a fair point that if you change policies for field .vout[].scriptPubkey for something that cannot be spent by an input (and you coded it well) that you won't affect policies for field .vin[].scriptSig. So keep Jimmy.

The point about not installing v30.0 without review is also a good one though and made multiple times. You should not install ANY version without careful review, so nothing changed.

As for Mechanic & Luke making a coup; wake me up when Antpool runs Knots. 😂

Unfollow these fools though.

100 sats \ 1 reply \ @028559d218 OP 13 Jun

Thanks for your feedback. I haven't been in Bitcoin that long... But this (Knots vs Core) is the most subtle and confusing issue that I've read about yet.

It's like 2 competing ideas that on the surface feel 'incompatible'. Or it's like other debates in society... the 'war on drugs'. 'The war on prostitution'. The 'war on X.' That nobody has really figured out.

Make it 'less accessible'... and maybe you stomp it out somewhat. Make it 'more expensive'. But you never totally get rid of it and by making it 'more rare' you get bigger and more resilient 'black markets' than you would otherwise... and that makes it worse (dark mempools, big private market APIs, more valuable "art" NFTs that are more "coveted" etc, harder fee estimation etc)

On the other hand if it's put 'out in the open' everyone can see what it is (usually spam) and the "free market" can decide what its value is and... where it "fits" in with the Big Picture. Long-term value. Real Capital.

I am pretty liberal/laissez-faire myself... so I value the "free-market" and education above all else. I believe the spam is 'priced-out' when more people use Bitcoin for obvious reasons and they will based on their curiosity and 'education' as to the world around them (more "freedom - oriented")

Knots (and its philosophy) is more conservative tho as is its author.

When I was younger I played the original "Stalker" series and in the game there were 2 'groups'... the Freedom Stalkers and the Duty Stalkers.

Freedom thought that co-existing with the Zone to understand it... was the best solution to the problems within it. The more mutants you kill the more that just crawl out and so the problem repeats.

Duty OTOH was all about "killing mutants" because that's what "duty" means. Killing mutants is your "duty" and in order to 'contain' the zone you have to kill them. A fascinating parallel.

https://gamerant.com/stalker-2-heart-of-chornobyl-duty-freedom-factions-explained/

Duty is all about containing the Zone, believing it to be an inherently harmful blight on the world. Their beliefs are easy to understand; given the deadly anomalies, brain-scorching emissions, and some of the most disturbing mutants in video games that define life in the Zone. If any of these threats escaped into the outside world, the consequences would be grave. Believing the regular military stationed on the borders of the exclusion zone are incapable of effectively fighting the entities within, Duty has no choice but to wage a private war on behalf of the human race.

On the other side is Freedom, the polar opposite of Duty. Seeing the artifacts and anomalies of the Zone as miracles to be explored and shared with the rest of humanity, Freedom believes its dangers can only be overcome by understanding, instead of destroying them. They claim that the spikes in mutant and blowouts are the result of the Zone defending itself against the likes of Duty and their attempts to destroy it. Though Freedom will hunt and destroy mutants, they do so out of necessity, rather than mandate.

21 sats \ 0 replies \ @optimism 13 Jun

You call tweets like the ones you linked subtle? haha.

The only thing that's really happening is a (relatively limited) crisis in confidence in Bitcoin Core maintainers. This isn't new, and that it's over a relatively rational policy change also isn't new. It can be blown out of proportions even more but it also pleases me to see Nicolas Dorier on nearly every thread trying to explain people that they're misleading themselves.

If I were a maintainer of bitcoin/bitcoin, the only learning point from this would be to not mark controversial settings that people want to use, even if it makes no sense to use it to super smart rational people like gmax, as deprecated. Note that one of the maintainers tried to do this in #32714, but for some reason it was closed by the author with no reason given on GitHub. I'm too lazy to check IRC logs.

That's it, that's the signal. The rest is politics and noise.