It's Knot a Serious Project by James Lopp \ stacker news ~bitcoin

pull down to refresh

It's Knot a Serious Project by James Lopp blog.lopp.net/knot-a-serious-project/

3648 sats \ 65 comments \ @megaptera 10h bitcoin

I don't know if this makes any difference, but I leave it here for reference.

Character assassination. I know the guy is a little strange, but as recently as a year ago the general consensus was that you could choose knots or core. Play around. Experiment. Now running knots is dangerous?

157 sats \ 2 replies \ @kepford 5h

As with most conflicts it has become less about the disagreements and more about the egos. I've been very disappointed by people on both sides of this argument. To me... its the most ridiculous thing I've seen in bitcoin since I've been paying attention.

To be fair, running either core (v30+) or knots is dangerous depending on who you ask.

I haven't read the article and I probably will not if I were gonna write a hit piece on Knots it would be about how it is downstream of Core and has much fewer eyes on it. Much fewer users exposing possible bugs and just less time in existence. All software has bugs and the more users and eyes you have the code the quicker they are found and stomped.

165 sats \ 1 reply \ @SimpleStacker 5h

if I were gonna write a hit piece on Knots it would be about how it is downstream of Core and has much fewer eyes on it

That's pretty much one of the articles main points

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford 5h

I say that because that is a classic issue with newer software. Even when it is better. Its a trade-off. I really lose respect for devs when they don't speak in trade-offs but instead in absolutes.

257 sats \ 8 replies \ @pakovm 10h

Always has been, now we just have an archive of all of Luke's terrible opinions and practices.

If you are choosing to ignore the proof because you consider it character assassination, I don't know what to tell you.

100 sats \ 7 replies \ @02ad8239c2 8h

the technical criticism is vastly outweighed by the personal in lopps hit piece, which then amusingly dangles ver, andresen and jailbird spagni in making it's case.

lopp's a shitcoiner, chow's a man dressed up as a woman who 'moderates' debates to his convenience, todd's a spook who wants to genocide Russsians, back is known for terrible takes since before the block size wars, corrallo wears perfume and introduced an inflation bug into core and didn't notice for 18 months...

If personal stuff is as relevant as lopp claims it is to judge worthiness to contribution, then maybe no one should be running core either ?

0 sats \ 6 replies \ @pakovm 8h

It's cool that you are this open about your mental illness.

0 sats \ 5 replies \ @02ad8239c2 8h

that's a cop out on your part

0 sats \ 4 replies \ @pakovm 8h

Nah, I'm just not discussing this stuff, you read the proof, you make your own opinion, my opinion is that Luke is and has been a bad actor.

If you want to lose your time defending it, good luck.

0 sats \ 3 replies \ @02ad8239c2 8h

it's not a defence, it's an observation regarding lopp's post and your comment on it.

0 sats \ 2 replies \ @pakovm 8h

You can also read the article and see that there's proof that code merged into Core has been reintroduced to Knots with changes, and there's no practical way to follow through those changes other than going line by line.

Also you can read in the conclusion, that it quite literally says:

Is bringing up Luke's security failures and eccentricities an ad hominem? I wish to be clear that while I disagree with Luke on a great many things, I support his right to say and do them. Unless he tries to put me in jail for raping his node, of course. I'd suggest we not cross that particular Rubicon.

But if we're looking at Luke through the lens of evaluating him for a leadership role in an open source project of immense global importance, as the sole maintainer of Knots I think it's quite relevant to consider his history and personal characteristics.

But nah, better just say "they are attacking my favourite bad actor, I will ignore this post, no matter the amount of proof that he is a bad actor".

view all 2 replies

36 sats \ 0 replies \ @LibreHans 6h

The interesting part is that all of that info was known, and people STILL prefer knots over core

36 sats \ 12 replies \ @billytheked 8h

Now running knots is dangerous?

I got the same feeling.

God-forbid I should ever fall out of consensus

0 sats \ 11 replies \ @pakovm 8h

Don't come crying when Luke introduces a consensus bug and you are out of the chain.

People have been warning about this for years, with not just Knots, but any alternative client as we don't have an independent consensus library, because nobody is funding the development to get it.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @sudonaka 2h

If a bad new update to a nodes falls out of consensus the next transactions would be rejected and the user would reset or use a different node.

What “damage” are you saying would be involved in that scenario?

0 sats \ 9 replies \ @billytheked 8h

Don't come crying when Luke introduces a consensus bug and you are out of the chain.

The fuck?

I said God-forbid I should fall out of consensus, meaning, Lopp's public bludgeoning of Luke is not something to which I am particularly partial to being subjected, as that was his main charge, as I understood it, against Dash, that he's is repeatedly "not in consensus."

I'm sure if Lopp could send him for "re-education" they would.

Another thing is, I'm not even sure why Lopp would even dirty his hands on this.

0 sats \ 8 replies \ @pakovm 7h

Care to explain what you meant and where I failed to understand it? English isn't my first language, so I you'd get that me reading comprehension is not the best when it comes to it sometimes.

I thought you meant that you hoped Knots never gets out of consensus.

0 sats \ 7 replies \ @billytheked 7h

Lopp's whole thesis is how Dash is "not in consensus" on seemingly common sense cypherpunk-y values. He is making a false analogy in protocol consensus and social consensus.

Therefore, woe to anyone if they should fall out of this so-called "consensus" is what I'm saying.

0 sats \ 6 replies \ @ZezzebbulTheMysterious 1h

Is it tho?

Conways law states that organizations design systems based on their communication, that is we write software the way we behave and communicate with each other. It’s all fractal reflections of invisible structures, each subsystem is similar the more you zoom in.

It is not absurd to state that a contentious, frequently half-truth spouting and authoritarian leader would write software that is contentious, non-truthful and authoritarian.

0 sats \ 5 replies \ @billytheked 1h

sounds speculative at best

the commentary here is not based so much on the how of Dash's communication but the what

saying Einstein was a bad physicist because he was a Jew is complete hogwash, and surely not an argument you would accept? very low standard, even for Lopp, I daresay

view all 5 replies

1201 sats \ 4 replies \ @pakovm 9h

inb4 "I don't trust Lopp so I won't read this and will ignore all proof that Luke is absolutely fucking nuts and should not be trusted"

0 sats \ 3 replies \ @pakovm 9h

Ah fuck, I just reloaded the page, too late.

0 sats \ 2 replies \ @BITC0IN 9h

quick! cut your balls off!

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @pakovm 8h

I did stop them from posting to their audiences that Lopp is a shitcoiner and Luke is a good actor, didn't I?

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @nitter 9h

https://xcancel.com/PakoVM/status/1970496512993198532

125 sats \ 6 replies \ @SimpleStacker 8h

I know this is not the main point, but I did want to comment on Luke's views on the government.

The question of when civil disobedience is justified is a question that Christian theologians have pondered for millennia. The Bible affirms that civil authorities are "instituted by God" for the purposes of punishing evil and rewarding good (Romans 13), but at the same time shows many examples of bad governance and civil disobedience (i.e. Daniel and the Lion's Den).

So the most common view is that governments have a legitimate role, but that they sometimes fail to fulfill their role; not unlike how humans are meant to live in a certain way, but we sometimes fail to live in that way. Thus, the most common view is that civil disobedience is allowed when obeying the government would cause you to violate some other moral principle. Like--it would be permissible to hide a Jew from a Nazi, or (potentially) it may be okay for Rosa Parks to disobey unjust discriminatory laws (the Bible also has much to say about partiality.)

However, those who have civilly disobeyed in the Bible also faced their legal punishments with dignity, and did not resort to other sins in order to avoid punishment (like killing police officers.) This is exemplified by how Jesus tells his disciples to put their swords away when he was being arrested.

So, yeah, not really bitcoin or even core vs. knots related. But I just wanted to comment because I think Luke's views are extreme and painting an inaccurate picture of a much more nuanced debate within Christian circles.

This is a repost. I said Lopp instead of Luke in the previous post, but couldn't edit anymore. So reposting to say what I actually meant. Luke is the one with extreme views, not Lopp.

30 sats \ 5 replies \ @kepford 5h

What tends to happen is the pro-government of the time people use Romans 13 and the anti-gov disagree. To me if you read Romans 13 and think it is referring to Rome and Nero you have to throw out Paul as a nut job. I must be referring to the ideal human authorities, not the current one.

91 sats \ 4 replies \ @SimpleStacker 5h

I don't think when Paul says "be subject to the governing authorities" he is referring only to an ideal human authority, because none has ever existed.

I think he is communicating a more general principle that Christians aren't called to be political revolutionaries. This would be consistent with Romans 12 ("so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all") and Romans 13:7 ("Pay to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed, revenue to whom revenue is owed, respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor is owed")

So I think the sense being communicated is that Christians should obey the laws in general, and disobedience would be the exception when another moral principle is at stake.

30 sats \ 1 reply \ @kepford 4h

Right, I don't disagree. with you there.

I think he is communicating a more general principle that Christians aren't called to be political revolutionaries.

100%

I'm more referring to this.

Romans 13:3–4

[3] For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, [4] for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer. (ESV)

Clearly Paul was doing good and the church under persecution was doing good and yet he writes "Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval". When we do not receive the approval of the state it doesn't mean we are doing wrong. Or when we do good, it doesn't mean the state will always approve of it. If this were true it surely would not apply to Hitler. And we know Jesus did good works and yet the governments of the Romans and the Jews killed him.

That's what I mean. So we should submit to authority but sometimes we can't if we are to do what is good. Daniel is a great example of this. Jesus is a great example of this. The book of Acts is full of examples.

The way some use Romans 13 is so broad that it boarders on absurdity. I have heard it used to defend the war in Iraq. Which, ironically would a government overthrowing a government... so how does that work with this application of the passage.

To me what makes the most sense is that in Romans 12 Paul describes what Christians should be about. "Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse them." I don't think anyone reading Paul's letter would think, of course! The Romans are good and doing God's work after reading chapter 12 (I know there were no chapters in the original letter). But they would understand that our response needs to be one of loving our friends and our enemies and realizing that Jesus Kingdom is not of this world. I see the thread through the New Testament of Jesus and His church overthrowing the hearts of men, not the governments of men.

This is why I believe that while I know taxation is theft, it is not my primary concern. My primary concern is the souls of men. Not my dollars. Though, there is nothing wrong with peacefully opposing certain practices of the state or even opposing it altogether in favor of a different form of governance. After all, we do not have the same form of governance they had in the time of Paul and in another 2000s years we likely will not have our current form. The principles still remain.

51 sats \ 0 replies \ @SimpleStacker 4h

I agree, some people misuse Romans 13 to justify any kind of government action and suggest that Christians should just take it uncritically

That wasn't the example set by the prophets, Jesus, or the apostles

30 sats \ 1 reply \ @kepford 4h

@SimpleStacker this is something we agree on

I think he is communicating a more general principle that Christians aren't called to be political revolutionaries.

And more and more I find both sides of the Christians into partisan politics seeming to think of themselves as politic first. Since the Kirk murder I've been getting both sides. The people appalled by what was doing and those concerned about the politics of those appalled(all my friends are appalled btw).

I'm getting more people concerned about Christian Nationalism. They are Christians. I repeatedly point out that these concerned about it aren't rejecting power. They just don't want that group of Christians to have it. They want the ring of power so they can use it to do "good". Redistributing wealth. Keeping the rich in check. Getting back to science, blah, blah, blah. It is clear as day to me that both sides want power and just disagree about the moral priorities. The left will claim it is dangerous for Christians to have power because of their moral rules. Yet both sides have moral rules they want to force on people.

I think both sides do not recognize how power works and simply want to run over their opponents. I keep gently bringing this up with the more left wing friends of mine. I just get tired of it. I don't like the Republicans for many reasons. The arguments on both sides could be better.

Do you have any advice on getting the non-MAGA Christians that are being manipulated by the left? Its so clear to me what is going on, but I can't force them to see it. One problem is that I don't think these people really understand MAGA Christians, but instead have a cartoon view of them. The reality is that prior to Trump the right had the type of Republicans these people claim to want. The McCain, Romney, even Bush Republicans. I recommend these friends read "Return of the Strong Gods". Only one has so far.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @SimpleStacker 29m

Do you have any advice on getting the non-MAGA Christians that are being manipulated by the left? Its so clear to me what is going on, but I can't force them to see it. One problem is that I don't think these people really understand MAGA Christians, but instead have a cartoon view of them.

I wish had some advice, but I don't.

Those who have a cartoon view probably just watch too much mainstream media. My dad is like that... as well as a few other friends. Basically, people who live like conservatives but are deathly afraid of Republicans because of what CNN/NYT/etc have fed them over the years.

It doesn't help when Republicans lean into the trolling, like "Alligator Alcatraz", or the recent "Gotta Catch em All" posts about rounding up immigrants, and other junk like that.

Mostly, I just try to find common ground with people, and try to get them to acknowledge the kernel of truth that each side holds.

67 sats \ 0 replies \ @BlokchainB 9h

Your node run what you want!

101 sats \ 9 replies \ @HardRich 7h

Luke may be a nut job. Perhaps Lopp is right to point that out. But from my point of view, it looks bad that Lopp spent the time to write that article vs writing why removing OP_RETURN is a net gain over potential negatives from removing it. Maybe I've missed all of his arguments? But, I'm not seeing it discussed in his list of posts on his website.

If he (or someone else) has written a nice article that lists the pros and cons of both sides and can show that removing OP_RETURN is a net positive then I'd be more convinced. Or, I should say, I'd rather run Core 30 but all this debate makes me question the update. Lopp losses points in my eyes for resorting to personal attacks vs spending time explaining the benefits of Core 30.

Does anyone know of a good article that fairly lists the pros/cons of removing OP_RETURN? I've seen what I think are fair discussions about NOT removing it, but I haven't yet seen any about removing it.

100 sats \ 8 replies \ @ek 7h

#1219092

0 sats \ 6 replies \ @itsrealfake 7h

my understanding is that the problem with JPEGs on chain is the challenge of performing IBD & validation on lower quality hardware.

if I need to get a transaction to the mempool, how do I get it to the network if I can't IBD? only through some third party.

IBD on low-quality hardware should be prioritized for this reason. It's my understanding (please help to correct my failings as you see fit) that this is the reason the Knots crowd seeks to prevent a chain filled with spam.

100 sats \ 5 replies \ @ek 7h

#1227437

50 sats \ 4 replies \ @itsrealfake 6h

Thanks, you're good at this. I replied there.... but here's the link

#1234216

11 sats \ 3 replies \ @ek 6h

Sorry, I am done talking about OP_RETURN

Why not talk about how your day was instead?

I hope you had or will have a wonderful day

100 sats \ 2 replies \ @itsrealfake 6h

totally fair.

it's been a mixed day... have been reintegrating to the default world after spending several weeks off-grid and deeply integrated to the immediate, present-moment reality that I was a part of building. it's usually a bit of a challenging transition, but this year has been more challenging than others... interpersonally, as well as individually.

while I was out there, I got quite a bit more fit & it feels good to be walking around in this state, feeling more healthy and invigorated. part of the challenge of reintroduction to this regular space is that it's tough to maintain the level of activity here that is totally normal and easy there... I guess I could be walking around the neighborhood instead of sharing my thoughts on the Internet... but here we are ;)

hope your day's going swimmingly.

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @ek 6h

With off-grid, do you also mean no—checks profile history—mhh yes, looks like also no internet

What you said reminded me of the time I lost my phone and I didn't buy another one for weeks and I had a great time. I should lose my phone again.

hope your day's going swimmingly.

I successfully avoided preparing my presentation for lightning++ by looking into Spark instead today

btw, it's really cool to know that I have met you irl, like you're a real person haha

view all 1 replies

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @HardRich 5h

So if I'm understanding things, folks in favor of removing OP_RETURN are worried about mining centralization because sneaky transactions are already happening and this will cause mining centralization. On the other side, folks in favor of keeping OP_RETURN are worried about storage of child porn and non-financial data. Do I have that right?

In the link you posted, the author stats that non-financial data will eventually get priced out of being on bitcoin. If that's true, then isn't the centralization of miners a temporary issue, as well?

Let's say that miners become centralized for a period of time. But then eventually bitcoin mining fees rip and non-financial data becomes untenable. At that point wouldn't miners start to decentralize? Or is the thought that once miners centralize it's the point of no return and/or that bitcoin fails?

50 sats \ 0 replies \ @OneOneSeven 8h

"Rosa Parks was committing the sin of disobedience"

lol jfc

21 sats \ 1 reply \ @standardcrypto 8h

I generally don't like lopp but this writeup was a service to bitcoin.

LukeJr has done great things in the past but now he has gone completely off the rails.

What a clown car knots is.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @dgdhr335 7h

Clown car how? Works fine and the vast majority of the code is identical to core with some tweaks or extra optionality.

30 sats \ 2 replies \ @siggy47 4h

If Trump were to enter the fray he would be calling Lopp "Little Jimmy" by now.

36 sats \ 1 reply \ @mtk4000 4h

Loony Luke

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @siggy47 4h

Yep, depending on who convinced him to pick a side at the last minute.

48 sats \ 0 replies \ @jgbtc 9h

If true then core's behavior is even worse than I thought. The reference client shouldn't be changed to appease one VC backed defi company. The only people who want this are shitcoiners like Lopp. If there's no viable alternative to core than this PR should be abandoned immediately.

21 sats \ 0 replies \ @jaspervanderee 9h

I don’t trust Lopp for one second. On multiple occasions I’ve questioned his judgment.

21 sats \ 0 replies \ @eduardopro 9h

Lopp is Knot to be trusted.

163 sats \ 0 replies \ @k00b 8h

There's a lot to say about this.

To stay positive: I'm impressed by Luke's contrariness. You want at least some of that. Most people have none.

2 sats \ 1 reply \ @itsrealfake 7h

The last sentence in the linked article written by Lopp:

Is that who you want leading development of freedom money?

Luke is exactly the person I want leading the development of the knots project.

Knot is a protest client. Luke has done a very good job of demonstrating his consistency of thought in these matters. He is not swayed by the hordes of less technical users appealing to a desire to be less at odds with fiat society.

Luke is a revolutionary actor, and may very well be doomed to fail as a leader... as was Malcom X, who was a notoriously uncomfortable personality for the status quo.

If Lopp were seriously interested in promoting the development of the Bitcoin protocol over the further centralization of consensus building power into The Bitcoin Core Cartel, he would instead be advocating for specific improvements to the knots development process, instead of slandering Luke for heterodoxy.

Luke is great. I told him as much the last time I saw him in person.

Knots isn't perfect software or a perfect project, but right now it's the only serious competitor to a bunch of (IMHO) seriously bothersome individuals who have cartelized development of the only alternative system of money humanity has.

Loop either doesn't understand the importance, or is ignoring it as part of a power game.

Luke is a very important actor in the space, he has consistently demonstrated his honesty amd integrity, his willingness and ability to stand on technical rounds against waves of actors with questionable motives, and his commitment to development of the client in ways that empower users over conglomerates.

We should circle our wagons around the Knots project, further its cause, improve it as best we can, encourage other clients that compete against and destabilize the Core Cartel, and we should recognize the power we have to discourage homogeny by supporting Luke and brilliant high-achieving committed people who we disagree with (what loop seems to think are) unacceptable religious and political views.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @ZezzebbulTheMysterious 1h

Everything you have said is ass backward friend. If you believe a single word of this, please rethink where you are getting your information. I’ve been around a long time, and can tell you that you are listening to the wrong people.

Re Knots, Please be warned that Knots will fork off the network one day. Then Luke’s followers can enjoy his “no hookers and no blackjack” “bitcoin” minority fork. It will be like bcash again, airdrop for everyone!

He’s been trying to take control of things for a decade+, and now, thanks to useful idiots, actually has a decent amount of suckers running his minority fork software. Be careful who you listen to.

1 sat \ 0 replies \ @gregtonoski 8h

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Fenix 1h

Now I know who Luke is

100 sats \ 0 replies \ @SimpleStacker 8h

deleted by author