What's the currently recommended drive size for IBD and full node?
Once Bitten! A Bitcoin Podcast.
Knots V Core And BIP 444, The Pleb Slop Edition. - Luke De Wolf # 577
By Daniel Prince
Aired Nov 25, 2025 · 2h 1m · Last boosted Dec 7, 2025
Chapters
Show Notes
Are you tired of hearing "It's too technical bro…"? $ BTC 87,162 Block Height 925,015 Today's guest is @lukedewolf, who joins me to discuss the Knots vs. Core debate and the recent appearance of BIP 444. Key Topics: Bitcoin Knots Core Bitcoin Improvement Proposals (BIPs) BIP444 Decentralization Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity Mining 'Spam' Transactions Luke explains his background in industrial control systems cybersecurity and draws parallels to Bitcoin as critical infrastructure. He emphasises the need for layered defences to protect against various threats and that filters, even basic ones, can effectively block a significant pe...
Nostr Boost Stats
- sats
- 12k
- boosts
- 8
- boosters
- 6
- sats
- 0
- boosts
- 0
- boosters
- 0
- sats
- 0
- boosts
- 0
- boosters
- 0
- sats
- 12k
- boosts
- 8
- boosters
- 6
Nostr Community
Everyone who has boosted Knots V Core And BIP 444, The Pleb Slop Edition. - Luke De Wolf # 577 on Nostr, ranked by sats sent, all time.
-
jgbtc
5k sats
-
Mischa
5k sats
-
ndeet
1.3k sats
-
DrDanielHodl
500 sats
- fairero voltier 444 sats
-
koala
108 sats
Other Episodes This Community Boosts Other shows' episodes boosted by people who boosted this episode
Jan 8, 2026
Nostr Boosts:30k
ndeetJan 12, 2026
420 MischaJan 11, 2026
30k Strong interview with very interesting points.The fact that financial service providers must always chase higher returns just to keep capital, otherwise it moves to competitors, makes you question whether this system has any real winners. In the end, it feels like there are only two options: no money at all, or money based on debt and controlled through debt. Bitcoin finally offers a way out of this.
Thank you, Peter. It’s clear that you truly want to make things better and that you are actively working toward change.
Oct 13, 2025
Nostr Boosts:5.4k
Mar 23, 2026
Nostr Boosts:1.8k
ndeetMar 26, 2026
420 Whic pr?
ndeetMar 24, 2026
420 Thanks for the insights. 👏
jgbtcMar 20, 2026
1k I'd love to see a core fork that is completely developed and maintained by nyms. Satoshi showed us the way, and it's a shame we didn't follow his example and make pseudonymity the defining characteristic of Bitcoin development culture. Any dev who's legal identity is known can be assumed to be compromised at this point.
Nostr Boosts:1.4k
ndeetOct 2, 2025
420 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.
ndeetOct 2, 2025
420 What bs are you talking abou Rizzo, lol.
ndeetOct 2, 2025
420 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 🤔
jgbtcSep 19, 2025
100 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.
Nostr Boosts:
fairero voltierDec 4, 2025
2.1k This might help a little more, nice to see a split to the podcast index too
fairero voltierDec 4, 2025
215 I gotta get you a proper ticket some time folks
Mar 16, 2026
Nostr Boosts:1.4k
ndeetMar 16, 2026
420 Very good and nuanced discussion about BIP-110 and surrounding topics 👏
jgbtcMar 16, 2026
1k This was hands down the best pro vs con conversion on bip110 I've heard. It's amazing how productive and informative it can be when both participants debate honestly, attempt to understand each other, and don't resort to cheap shots, insults and straw manning. Thank you gentlemen!
Nostr Boosts:1.4k
MischaFeb 12, 2026
1k Thanks for the interview. I largely agree with Jimmy on almost all points, which is precisely why his final conclusion is hard to reconcile. He clearly understands the reasons for pursuing a fork and even acknowledges the upside of what is often framed as the strongest criticism of the BIP: that it makes future changes to Bitcoin harder. A stricter consensus reduces the risk of frequent or careless modifications and helps protect Bitcoin’s long-term stability.
The only serious counterargument he raises is the risk of a network split. But Bitcoin is a long-term project, not a political compromise. If we believe something strengthens Bitcoin over the long run, short-term risks should not automatically prevent action. Doing nothing is also a choice. Clear signaling matters: the more people openly signal their position instead of waiting on the sidelines, the clearer the real consensus becomes and the stronger Bitcoin will be in the future.
ndeetFeb 10, 2026
420 Very good perspectives. Especially about finding out about minority fork, makes me still a bit uneasy thinking about that 😄
Seems Walker also came around from unconditionally following Core opinion. Biggest take: there is often nuance and seldomly just black and white.
Jan 8, 2026
Nostr Boosts:30k
MischaJan 11, 2026
30k Strong interview with very interesting points.The fact that financial service providers must always chase higher returns just to keep capital, otherwise it moves to competitors, makes you question whether this system has any real winners. In the end, it feels like there are only two options: no money at all, or money based on debt and controlled through debt. Bitcoin finally offers a way out of this.
Thank you, Peter. It’s clear that you truly want to make things better and that you are actively working toward change.
Nostr Boosts:
fairero voltierJun 10, 2026
22k V4v
And
Oto to the mmo defensive...
Congrats on the milestone and corruption free media deconstruction!
Please verify i am not a fed :)
Feb 23, 2026
Nostr Boosts:1.1k
MischaFeb 18, 2026
100 Thanks for the podcast. I agree with almost everything.
One more specific point I would add: every additional development on Bitcoin increases complexity and with it the risk of errors. Each new layer makes us more dependent on developers, on how they interpret the code, and how they assess trade-offs.
The more complex the system becomes, the harder it is for the network as a whole to evaluate changes and make sound decisions. At the same time, the attack surface grows, both technically and socially. Greater dependency also increases the risk of capture or undue influence.
In that sense, a simple and clearly defined protocol is not stagnation. It is protection.
jgbtcFeb 17, 2026
1k Great conversation. I'm a believer in "strong opinions loosely held'. There's nothing wrong with reassessment and changing your mind at any time, although it doesn't seem like there's any major disagreement with hodlonaut's views and those of BIP-110 supporters. Regardless, I respect his choice to withdraw support. Taking a non-committal view while assessing is always wise. An episode with Giacomo on the topic next would be awesome.
Dec 24, 2025
Nostr Boosts:20k
MischaDec 26, 2025
20k Excellent episode. Very informative and well spent two hours. Thank you.
Nostr Boosts:10k
jgbtcJul 14, 2026
10k Awesome episode!
Nostr Boosts:10k
jgbtcMay 29, 2026
10k 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.
Nostr Boosts:1.3k
ndeetMar 9, 2025
420 Andere Kritikpunkte stimme ich zu.
ndeetMar 9, 2025
420 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.
ndeetMar 9, 2025
420 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.
Nostr Boosts:1.3k
Sep 14, 2026
Nostr Boosts:5k
jgbtcSep 15, 2026
5k Dave crushes it starting at 47:51, absolutely perfect, spot on rant. We are the ones staying to fight. Thank you for stepping up and being a voice for the resistance.
Dec 4, 2025
Nostr Boosts:5k
jgbtcDec 8, 2025
5k "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!
Nov 24, 2025
Nostr Boosts:5k
jgbtcNov 24, 2025
5k Really good discussion. The spam issue is still worth talking about and will remain so indefinitely because it's really about fundamental rifts between bitcoin stakeholders. So I'm sympathetic to Tomer's weariness of the topic, but thank you both for slogging through it anyway. The discussion should continue. More battles are on the horizon I think that will fall along the same fault line.
Nov 21, 2025
Nostr Boosts:5k
jgbtcNov 21, 2025
5k 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
Oct 22, 2025
Nostr Boosts:5k
jgbtcOct 22, 2025
5k Great episode.
Sep 10, 2025
Nostr Boosts:5k
jgbtcSep 10, 2025
5k Great episode!
Nostr Boosts:5k
jgbtcMay 13, 2025
5k Another awesome episode. Thanks Guy!
May 2, 2025
Nostr Boosts:5k
jgbtcMay 6, 2025
5k 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.
May 3, 2025
Nostr Boosts:5k
jgbtcMay 5, 2025
5k Great conversation!
Apr 15, 2025
Nostr Boosts:5k
jgbtcApr 15, 2025
5k Excellent Guy's Take. 🔥🔥🔥
Nostr Boosts:5k
MischaDec 15, 2024
5k After watching that episode, I couldn’t stop thinking about it all day. Our entire perspective on the economy is built on a flawed premise. Our unit of measurement isn’t constant. Bitcoin will change this forever. Thank you, it was truly fascinating!
Nostr Boosts:
fairero voltierMay 14, 2026
2.6k This is a really interesting way to challenge repression! What a tragedy for the poor deceased and an inventive way to respond.
Nostr Boosts:
fairero voltierApr 24, 2026
2.6k Yes!
The podfather and podsage solve the internet again...
Looking forward to hearing this one
Nostr Boosts:
fairero voltierMay 27, 2026
2.2k Oto @trashman good cage rattling over with the canaries... if anyone is on the offensive that wanna slay some nephalum i reckon gonzo and basil are excellent missionaries for the cause.
Go to ccnt and read ya bibleeee
Episode Boosts
Every boost sent to this episode, as published to Nostr, newest first.
-
-
-
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 really, really simple: who is trying to CHANGE the Bitcoin code? Core or Knots?
-
👏
-
-
Thanks for clearing that up and taking on the thorns :)
-
A great podcast. If you want to understand the Core vs. Knots topic, this is a must-listen.
