Thread

Zero-JS Hypermedia Browser

Relays: 5
Replies: 8
Generated: 23:42:59
Login to reply

Replies (8)

What in the world are you talking about? The point is trying to fix node policy filters, fix bugs introduced with Segwit the Core devs refuse to fix, and limit some areas of consensus that have been big areas of spam abuse. Also, limiting OP_Return down to prevent Bitcoin becoming a file storage system with potential dangerous outcomes. You gotta be careful. The Core-advocates are making up all kinds of stuff. I'm not aware of any lawsuits (fill me in if you are). I think the initial release of BIP444 had a conflict with some old, rare method of multi-sig, but that has been fixed as far as I know.
2025-11-13 02:19:33 from 1 relay(s) ↑ Parent 1 replies ↓ Reply
Its not just policy anymore they think consensus needs to be changed now, try to keep up. They just postponed the activation date of their disaster softfork because they overlooked some spending scenarios. Some coins using modern tapscript would become unspendable etc… oops sorry you cant spend your coins anymore because of our β€˜spam’ measures.. its a total shitshow, irresponsible and reckless behavior and i will never trust these retards again with anything. https://x.com/mononautical/status/1988449182462660964
2025-11-13 07:07:55 from 1 relay(s) ↑ Parent 1 replies ↓ Reply
I agree consensus needs to be changed, but I'm aware of talk around some of these potential issues, and afaik, they are being worked on. I agree that even locking such transactions (accidentally) for a year wouldn't be good, and needs to get fixed. But, so does Bitcoin! Hopefully we can all come to some compromise that doesn't break things (that haven't been purposely setup to break thing... or were using some really far-out non-standard method), but still fixes Bitcoin. It is well past time to reign in the abuse, and make Bitcoin about money again!
2025-11-15 20:04:58 from 1 relay(s) ↑ Parent Reply