pull down to refresh
100 sats \ 7 replies \ @028559d218 16h \ parent \ on: Maintaining The Spirit - Bitcoin Mechanic bitcoin
The filterers don't want to run another client. They don't want a "forked repo"... They don't want to 'co-exist' with Core...
They think Core is "captured" and "corrupted" Mechanic has said it himself they want a total takeover so that everyone runs knots. "Then" Bitcoin will be pure again.
reply
I think its partially neutered, not captured. And yes, that was done by a scammer, CSW. Core cannot exert control over policy like in the early days, and that's a situation that we will all have to live with.
The PR that kicked off the conflict was Luke's filter PR that got NAKd. The current situation, despite it being fueled by misinformation, is okay. If you need a specific policy on your node, run a node software that implements that.
Instead of endless drama, all that energy would be better spent making knots better. Hardening the processes. If it is true that the installed base of knots has grown from 1% to 18%, then there's 18x the responsibility now. Plenty of work to be done, so everyone stfu and work hard.
reply
Please see this post here #1079571
reply
reply
Furthermore... the things that Mechanic says are not true. I am not a fan of Monero I don't trust it, however saying that XMR has been 'completely captured' is ridiculous.
Is it less secure? Is its security compromised? Yes absolutely. It looks really fragile that some random ****coin can do so much damage...
However it's not a 51% attack. Also, the price has dropped. They are literally selling it under market to get out of it on Robosats in large quantities go look yourself.
The phrase "Only a Sith deals in absolutes" comes to mind.
reply
Furthermore... the things that Mechanic says are not true.
I think that there is no way to fix the divide anymore, but that's not to blame on a single side in this conflict. Both sides chose escalation, both sides are in an echo chamber.
I think he's right saying that "this" (I'd call it polarization) is a much larger problem than just specific to bitcoin or "filters"; it's a societal trend and it sucks and I have no answers. He's also right in some of his assertions about how Bitcoin has changed since 2013, and I agree with him that it's not for the better in many aspects. Except one really important thing that he ignores while saying it's about people: some of the new blood - that weren't around in 2013 - are really awesome and doing great work, no matter if you like them or their politics. And that's exactly what the polarization does: it makes people biased and prejudiced.
I too am biased. I too have become much more toxic than I used to be. But at least I know it and I try to correct it if I go too far. I haven't seen anyone in this conflict admit that maybe they've been taking things too far. And that's why this won't be fixed, so it's better to move on.
However it's not a 51% attack.
From the little I've read, it sounded like it's literally a 51% attack by some second or third order shitcoin? Bitcoiners have the luxury to hang back while this plays out, and analyze this when there's more clarity. We can always red-team how to apply this to Bitcoin. But would be useless to do it while it is still ongoing. Should just capture data.
reply
think he's right saying that "this" (I'd call it polarization) is a much larger problem than just specific to bitcoin or "filters"
Something that appealed to me so much about Bitcoin... is its technical foundation. I don't have to care about someone's politics or how they vote or the color of their skin or what they feel about certain 'issues'...
Do they have the keys or not? And do they want to pay for the blockspace or not? It's "pay up or shut up" and that gives people a remarkable ability to ignore the noise.
It's the "GFY money" of our time... the traders/financiers and "bitcoin treasury companies" can go **** themselves with their conferences. Do they have the keys or not according to a verified download of Bitcoin Core on an old laptop the rest is irrelevant.
He's also right in some of his assertions about how Bitcoin has changed since 2013, and I agree with him that it's not for the better in many aspects.
I can't stand twitter anymore I completely deleted it. Even Nostr i generally ignore, unless its news or something software related from some developer...
I choose to "focus on my craft" stack sats usually non-kyc and CoinJoin. That's it.
If the morons want to play "bitcoin treasury company" I could give a **** I do not endorse any new opcodes at this time and in no way shape or form want a "block size increase." Why?
Scammers will scam that's what they do... they will come and go. What they can't do is get Bitcoin for free, break consensus, or guess private keys (not without some kind of quantum computer).
I too am biased. I too have become much more toxic than I used to be. But at least I know it and I try to correct it if I go too far. I haven't seen anyone in this conflict admit that maybe they've been taking things too far. And that's why this won't be fixed, so it's better to move on.
I can't stand shitcoins. I have written about them, the disease that is "crypto" on SN many times and how it confuses people and how the Trump administration is whitewashing unregistered securities. The whole thing (all the unregistered securities) will eventually collapse they are based on thin air it's not if it's when.
Having said that... I still don't care.
I've never once not ever bought a shitcoin I have zero interest in them, and at the end of the day the degens will waste their money, suffer massive opportunity costs paying transactional fees and the network will march on.
All the millions wasted paying for arbitrary data in late 2023... on "inscriptions" and "NFTs" where did that go? To the miners.
Who have less Bitcoin? The scammers.
The scammers have less and the hodlers/stackers more the rest is noise.
From the little I've read, it sounded like it's literally a 51% attack by some second or third order shitcoin? Bitcoiners have the luxury to hang back while this plays out, and analyze this when there's more clarity. We can always red-team how to apply this to Bitcoin. But would be useless to do it while it is still ongoing. Should just capture data.
What always concerned me about XMR... was this idea that 'the devs will fix it' or "the next hardfork will make it OK"....
Really? So why exactly who are these devs? How do they get consensus to change things? And what happens if you "don't agree" with the changes? The vulnerabilities IMO go far beyond the qubic attack, and strike at whether the network can be easily changed and that never sat right with me.
reply