ODELL's avatar
ODELL odell@primal.net 3 months ago
i do not feel comfortable telling people to run knots until it has better review and release processes in place if you do not want to relay larger op return transactions then run core v29 (the most recent version of core) and do not update to v30 when it is released alternatively you can run v30 with a modified config file i think luke, mechanic, and most core contributors mean well and care about bitcoin long term i want to see more well reviewed bitcoin implementations exist, more choices for node operators is strictly better, this is one of the reasons i have donated my time to build out opensats i think this ‘debate’ has mostly devolved into social attacks and is mostly unproductive i do not think it matters much for the global bitcoin network which client you run, in this specific situation i have said much on this topic in the past, use the search feature if you are curious
↑ Parent

Replies (18)

scrolls of ancient wisdom's avatar
scrolls of ancient wisdom 3 months ago
This is opinion is natural to slightly biased to core. The reason why people are running knots even without the best review is because we feel offended and betrayed.
dagwood's avatar
dagwood 3 months ago
Cooler heads prevail. Best "NOT TWITTER" explanation I have seen.
SatsAndSports's avatar
SatsAndSports 3 months ago
The code for the consensus rules should be in a separate library, and that library should be used by all implementations I'm usually all for having a variety of open implementations, but we need to avoid an y chance of a hard fork that is accidentally introduced via an accidental change in consensus code. This happened in March 2013
Alert: chain fork caused by pre-0.8 clients dealing badly with large blocks
Alert: chain fork caused by pre-0.8 clients dealing badly with large blocks
Bitcoin Magazine
Bitcoin Network Shaken By Blockchain Fork
Yesterday, the Bitcoin network experienced one of the most serious hiccups that we have seen in the past four years. Starting from block 225430, the
1 replies ↓
Default avatar
npub12uwt...u26s 3 months ago
@ODELL could you be more specific regarding what a "better review and release process" looks like? Or at least what it definitely doesn't look like. How many reviewers would make you feel more comfortable, what is the best release process you've seen in another project etc.
Cobweb's avatar
Cobweb 3 months ago
This only works in the short term. Eventually you will need the security patches for Core 30, 31, 32, 33... They're going to force this eventually. Staying on v29 is a short term solution. We I do agree we need Knots to grow in its governance to be a true competitor to Core.
Skanderbeg's avatar
Skanderbeg 3 months ago
If that's something you are concerned about, which is another conversation.
pedro's avatar
pedro pedro@nostr.fan 3 months ago
you're talking about long term, but do you think core 30 may cause a short/mid term problem though? we have a precedent with what happened on bsv, when they raised op return to 100kb and i don't understand yet why this huge risk is being taken so lightly. "just don't update your node" won't be helpful, when other people do update and stuff ends up on a block
1 replies ↓
Branca's avatar
Branca branca@bitcoinNostr.com 3 months ago
All it takes is one miner not using OP_RETURN filters for all nodes, including yours, to store illicit material. This is the only argument they should refute or substantiate much better. At this point, and given what's happening, I think influential people are definitely compromised.
↑