Geek's avatar
Geek
1dullgeek@nostrplebs.com
npub1k8ly...d3qu
Christian, Geek, #GoPackGo, #Bitcoin, Pilot Anarcho Christian? Maybe Happily Married 30+years
Geek's avatar
1dullgeek 3 weeks ago
I'm posting this below the 2000 sat limit because I don't need you to read it on the pod but I know you read all of these and wanted to give a different perspective As a pilot, there are some outcomes that are so catastrophic that we build in lots and lots of mitigations so that we don’t EVER encounter them. An example is fuel. Running out of fuel increases the likelihood of a crash to nearly 100%. Meanwhile the actual incidence of fuel related crashes in commercial aviation is very close to 0. The fact that the incidence is close to 0 doesn’t mean we can safely remove fuel reserve requirements, or proper fuel planning processes. This is how I see the SPAM debate. There are some outcomes (e.g. illegal data in the chain) that are so bad that, even if we haven’t seen it yet, we have to build as many mitigations as possible. If the US government can prosecute the samourai developers despite Section 230, it’s hard to imagine that node operators that knowingly host illegal data would also be immune from prosecution as a way to attack Bitcoin. So we have to build in multiple layers of mitigation to prevent that catastrophe. With Core deciding to open up OP_RETURN to 100k bytes, they’ve taken away one of those mitigations. For me personally, best case scenario: OP_RETURN goes back to 83 bytes and the inscriptions bug gets fixed. Barring that, what is the next best mitigation in order to prevent the catastrophic result of illegal data on the chain? Certainly a soft fork is a far worse option. But it might be the next best option. Still I’d much rather that core come to their senses. If not, that more people run knots - or some other bitcoins that allows for filtering OP_RETURN. Only after both of those fail, would I like to see a soft fork. Because we can’t tolerate the catastrophic result of illegal data on chain.
Fountain
This Week in Bitcoin • 82: The Missing Variable • Listen on Fountain
Once you see the missing variable, Bitcoin’s pullback clicks into place. The four-year cycle is cracking, and the filter-fork battle isn’t cool...
 View quoted note →
Geek's avatar
1dullgeek 1 month ago
As a pilot, there are some outcomes that are so catastrophic that we build in lots and lots of mitigations so that we don’t EVER encounter them. An example is fuel. Running out of fuel increases the likelihood of a crash to nearly 100%. Meanwhile the actual incidence of fuel related crashes in commercial aviation is very close to 0. The fact that the incidence is close to 0 doesn’t mean we can safely remove fuel reserve requirements, or proper fuel planning processes. This is how I see the SPAM debate. There are some outcomes (e.g. illegal data in the chain) that are so bad that, even if we haven’t seen it yet, we have to build as many mitigations as possible. If the US government can prosecute the samourai developers despite Section 230, it’s hard to imagine that node operators that knowingly host illegal data would also be immune from prosecution. So we have to build in multiple layers of mitigation to prevent that catastrophe. With Core deciding to open up OP_RETURN to 100k bytes, they’ve taken away one of those mitigations. For me personally, best case scenario: OP_RETURN goes back to 83 bytes and the inscriptions bug gets fixed. Barring that, what is the next best mitigation in order to prevent the catastrophic result of illegal data on the chain? Certainly a soft fork is a far worse option. But it might be the next best option. Still I’d much rather that core come to their senses. If not, that more people run knots - or some other bitcoins that allows for filtering OP_RETURN. Only after both of those fail, would I like to see a soft fork. Because we can’t tolerate the catastrophic result of illegal data on chain.
Geek's avatar
1dullgeek 2 months ago
Re video, it's great when there are visuals that help convey information. But as soon as people do that the audio version suffers and I tend to switch to the video version only. Is there some way to stream sats while watching the link to the video feed?
Fountain
This Week in Bitcoin • 78: The Great Rotation • Listen on Fountain
The Binance era fades, the ETFs rise, and Bitcoin quietly migrates into the core of the financial system. The rotation has begun. Episode Links ...
 View quoted note →
Geek's avatar
1dullgeek 3 months ago
Really great episode. I kindly request more like this, where the topic is about how one might help convince my skeptical church leadership to save on Bitcoin. This is particularly relevant to me as I've been saving my tithe in Bitcoin on their behalf for a few years now. (With their blessing.) But I don't want to give it to them yet because their policy is to immediately turn it into USD. So any advice or discussion on how to get them to change their mind/policy is very much appreciated.
Fountain
Thank God for Bitcoin • TGFB Pod Episode 68 - Pastor Ben Hailey • Listen on Fountain
Pastor Ben Hailey shares his journey of faith, his experiences with Bitcoin, and the intersection of faith and financial stewardship. He discusses ...
 View quoted note →
Geek's avatar
1dullgeek 3 months ago
Back to the grind. Stacking continues.
Geek's avatar
1dullgeek 3 months ago
I'm overwhelmed by how often people want to solve the pedestal problem before the monkey problem.
Geek's avatar
1dullgeek 3 months ago
I don't think keeping transactions with op_return > 80 bytes is censorship. In exactly the same way that I don't think letting minors create more than 21 million Bitcoin is censorship. Calling both of those censorship is demagoguery.
Fountain
This Week in Bitcoin • 72: The Spam War • Listen on Fountain
Fiat markets are cracking, and Bitcoin is tearing itself apart in a spam war. Both point to an impending reckoning. Affiliate Links 🇺🇸 Buy S...
 View quoted note →
Geek's avatar
1dullgeek 4 months ago
I think you misunderstood the fire movement. They're not trying to get a 25x return. They're trying to reduce their spending so that having a nest egg that is 25x their annual spending is easier. And then live a lifestyle that allows them to withdraw 1/25th (4%) every year. The growth they need to sustain that is to merely match inflation. They don't need 25x to do that.
Fountain
This Week in Bitcoin • 67: The Treasury Vacuum • Listen on Fountain
Reserve tricks, revaluation games, and a brewing liquidity storm. While quietly, the groundwork for a national Bitcoin reserve is laid. Episode Lin...
 View quoted note →
Geek's avatar
1dullgeek 4 months ago
As a PNRI, not all of us are stuck in the fiat mindset. I personally am as all in on Bitcoin as I can be until I actually retire. It's my long term savings. It's my checking. My paycheck goes directly into Bitcoin. We are not beholden to our generational ideas. And it is each of our responsibility to question our assumptions. Which has fed my orange pill.
Fountain
This Week in Bitcoin • 67: The Treasury Vacuum • Listen on Fountain
Reserve tricks, revaluation games, and a brewing liquidity storm. While quietly, the groundwork for a national Bitcoin reserve is laid. Episode Lin...
 View quoted note →
↑