Feral Analysis
@analysisferal
Chart Analysis, Trading, Bitcoin. Opinions and views expressed are my own and are not recommendations to buy or sell any asset. Not financial advice.
ID: 1557790177245921282
http://www.feralanalysis.com 11-08-2022 18:05:05
1,1K Tweet
169 Followers
398 Following
Mark of Bitcoin Feral Analysis hodlonaut #BIP-110 Chris Guida | ⚡🪢 BIP110 Adam Back Pledditor BIP-110 would not be nearly as effective as a permanent measure as it is as a temporary measure. The permanent solution, if one exists, would take much longer to design and build.
Luke Dashjr Steve Wilkinson Bitcoinapolis: BIP-110 no S̷P̷A̷M̷ 🤓 I can't believe I have to explain to Luke Dashjr that a chain split is possible if BIP-110 activates and miners don't follow the fork... You guys have officially most it. A bitcoin technicals moron (me) has to inform you it's possible miners don't follow your attempted fork.
Other ₿arry Giacomo Loathsome Bitcoin Destroyer Zucco You can be pro-Knots, pro-Ocean, pro-more decentralized client software, critical of Core and still be anti BIP-110 UASF...
Steve Wilkinson bacl'fōō Luke Dashjr Bitcoinapolis: BIP-110 no S̷P̷A̷M̷ 🤓 What's being held back? BIP-345 for vaults, Deadman's vault/inheritance features, BIP-360 for quantum resistance and inheritance. Work on all of that would likely get pushed way back or dropped completely if RDTS if implemented. All require taproot.
Bitcoin for Freedom No, removing the datacarriersize default was reactionary because it was already being bypassed. That's the part you can't wrap your head around. The devs didn't decide it needed to be removed, the most permissive users did. Your anger towards the devs is misguided.
Jameson Lopp Something I hadn't considered before. You don't want the cost of running a node to be way too cheap, as this would facilitate a sybil attack such as this. So having a minimum cost barrier to run a node is preventative of this. I never thought I would run into a "benefit" of spam.