When Luke speaks, he does so from the perspective that bip-110 has majority support and is bound to succeed, without considering the possibility of failure. This is only half the truth and ignores the other half. It is a completely politicized argument designed to deceive the unwary and uninformed. As I said, it’s not much different from what Core has done with the spam.
Cyph3rp9nk's avatar Cyph3rp9nk
And that's how politicians talk image View quoted note →
View quoted note →

Replies (14)

rieger_san's avatar
rieger_san 1 week ago
They all pushing their own narratives! Best is to use a client and configure it yourself. And after that! Only install updates if necessary
Be careful. He’s going to accuse you of "not understanding any of this".
Travellight's avatar
Travellight 1 week ago
appreciate this - my sentiments entirely. Mind you, Mechanic was a breath of fresh air on "what Bitcoin did." Its pick a hill time.
Just because you’re not understanding what he’s saying doesn’t mean he’s not right. The opposition is not running a counter fork, so this means BIP-110 is technically uncontested.
rieger_san's avatar
rieger_san 1 week ago
I wouldn’t run knots because the implementation has many “spam” filters you can’t configure
rieger_san's avatar
rieger_san 1 week ago
But you can run an older core version without problems if you don’t need the newest features
Yep… appreciate knots and actually leaning towards bip110 but this turns me off actually. Spam may be less dangerous than this fear mongering and hyperbole. Sad to see
I’m not for or against at this stage. I was for Knots initially but when Luke’s clearly entering into conversations in bad faith I can’t keep doing so.