Bitcoin Core From the Inside | Jon Atack | BIS #195

Banger

@npub1hk0tv47zt… is so unhinged, love it!

Great episode, thanks! Core's main argument (repeated ad nauseum) is filters don't work 100% of the time. It doesn't need to be perfect, it needs to be as good as possible. Maximum friction for spammers and anyone else who wants to use Bitcoin for non-monetary uses. Of course miners will do anything for money, that's exactly why an op_return limit and other policies are needed, but certain core devs have twisted this around to justify removing one of the few tools available to pleb node operators (the absurdly high v30 default is effectively the same as removal). The point Luke makes at 1:36:40 is particularly good. Core supporters focus on one side of the equation, the spam that gets mined, and ignore what isn't. The thing about deterrents is we can't know how many attacks aren't even attempted at all because a deterrent exists. In the firewall example, at least intrusion attempts can be detected, but the attacks that never happen can't be measured and so are easy to ignore and dismiss. This is one of many flaws in Core's arguments. Thanks again guys!

👏

It’s rare these days that I’m shocked, but this blew my socks off multiple times! Not sure what to make of it but let’s have some more please 🙏

Awesome episode!

I quit drinking years ago, over a decade, and the thing that helped the most was to think of my desire to drink as this little person inside me, and me beating the shit out of him every time he tried to talk me into cheating. I can say from this experience that everything you said about appetite in this episode was spot on and high signal. I appreciate it.

This was great, something I’ve been coming to terms with recently is I don’t think it’s (BTC adoption) going to happen as quickly as I expect it should or wish it would.

@npub1unmftuzmk… I was just gloating to my wife about ad-free subscription podcasts on @npub1v5ufyh4lk…. She was very envious. There is widespread appeal for this.

@npub1s5yq6wadw… is BTC Fundamentals going to embrace the @npub1v5ufyh4lk… ad-free subscription model? I love your show and really hate ads 😉

I fucking love ad-free subscription option. Sorry @npub1guh5grefa… but I don’t miss your Fold card as reads 😉

Not listened yet but fired up for some flagrant Luongo

@npub1unmftuzmk… there are still serious issues with @npub1v5ufyh4lk… I just lost this episode mid listen and history for the show going back to September. Only recovered this episode due to activity history.

This was great, havent had a Bitcoin pod get me frothy in a while 🙏

This is wild, still nor sure what to make of it all, but awesome series, thanks Princey 🙏

Started episode 5 of this series and had to pause to go start from the beginning

Really enjoyed this, good guest especially considering it was his first rodeo, yeehaaw

Actually enjoyed this but it was hard work. Am a little unclear about how we fix the world though? Move to the wilderness with a Starlink satellite, build online social capital, and hope the PayPal Mafia take down some roadblocks? I don’t understand how PayPal Mafia reconciles with decentralisation? What am I missing here?

There is a big difference if you signal shitcoins are welcome or you focus on money and discourage non-monetary use cases. There are plenty of shitcoins they can play on. Nodes and users are important otherwise it deceases to be Bitcoin and becomes captured and centralized.

What bs are you talking abou Rizzo, lol.

I have never heard that knots supporters argue that they don't believe that a fee market establishes in the future. Hmm, why you think Luke is for 300kb blocks 🤔

At 54:30, Pete compley loses the plot. Core is making this change not knots. Pointing out the problem doesn't create the problem. Core is creating the problem and ignoring it, as Pete seems to prefer, doesn't make it disappear. It's a truly bizarre argument to blame the messenger. Also there is zero need for knots to ever fork. We just want the ability to configure a limit on op_return. Core certainly wants knots to fork because then their opposition goes away, but there's nothing to be gained in that for knots users.

Great rip!

Andere Kritikpunkte stimme ich zu.

Super Argument Dennis. Tom blendet Kernproblematik aufgrund von Indizien-DoS ab und kommt zu falschen Rückschlüssen. Ganz ohne technisches Verständnis kann man halt leider keine Rückschlüsse auf Validität der Indizien und Schutz vor Zentralisierung ziehen, sorry Tom.

Genau andersrum, Ver und Co waren die großen Player (Exchanges, Miner, ..) die ihre Geschäftsmodelle schützen wollten und via Blockgröße einfachste Lösung durchdrücken wollten (Zentralisierung). Mining Pools würden mit Bigblocks noch mehr zentralisiert sein weil schwerer Nodes zu betreiben. Pools ist ein Problem, Lösung Stratum v2, Ocean/Datum um Blocktemplates zu dezentralisieren. Ver/Bigblocks hätte nichts daran geändert bzw. verschlimmert. Blocksizewar als neutralere Quelle lesen.

💯

"distributed authoritarianiam" Wow, what a 🚩by Greg Maxwell, who is perfectly fine with centralized authoritarianism by Core. Such a fundamental misunderstanding of the issue, and what it means to run your own node, is a serious problem considering who it's coming from. Turns out "the experts" aren't the experts we thought they were. The way core proponents twist the meaning of censorship and authoritarianism is alarming. Another great discussion. Thanks guys!

The best example of core going woke was the blackist change in 2020. It's a particularly good example because the PR author explicitly did it for woke reasons: to use a "more appropriate" word and "make everyone happy". Contrary to Murch's claim that core tries to keep conversations technical (around 1:39:00), this PR had no technical justification at all. This was a good conversation, but if anything it made me even more anti-core. A lot of nitpicky weak arguments from Murch, and dismissive hand waving of valid concerns. We know there is more than one core dev, we have read the core arguments and we are still unconvinced. For all Murch's appeals for understanding the core position (I did make it to the end) he seems to have made very little effort to understand the position against this change. I read the "experts" letter, did he read the rebuttals? https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19227

Great episode.

Great rip

@npub1wes30pmnspcxgxwdtz2zvehpg3cm0rjseemfekzmr5mmffkw583qm48688 this is worth a listen, I know you have the time 😉

Great episode!

I saw What’s the Problem a few months ago, it’s great, love the origin story 🙏

Another awesome episode. Thanks Guy!

Awesome discussion. Mechanic's summary at the start was more convincing than anything I've heard in favor of this retarded change. The beginning of the core woke infestation was the PR to remove the word "blacklist" from some test code because, somehow, this word is offensive. All the devs cried "it's no big deal" but I knew at the time it was a bad sign. Now core is a woke cesspool. I will not be running their software anymore.

Great conversation!