https://x.com/joshman/status/2076726328297230399
So I saw this gem today on The Social Media Site Formerly Known As Twitter and it really just blew me away just how delusional everyone is getting as we approach the Bitcoin soft-fork in August commonly known as BIP-110. My feed is just absolutely littered with Bitcoin maximalists with "BIP-110" appended to their username all chanting the same story that Bitcoin Core is doomed and that this soft fork is actually going to succeed. Thus far all the actual evidence points to the exact opposite of what these people think they want.
I say that very deliberately in that most people who seem to support BIP-110 don't actually seem to understand what it does other than try to eliminate "spam" and fight the good fight against "shitcoins". Oh and let's not forget that if you don't support BIP-110 that actually proves you support pedophiles. I swear the jokers spearheading this operation are getting propaganda coaching directly from the FBI and central banks. It's all just so textbook and exhausting.
I swear I have to constantly remind myself what this softfork even does because it's such a pointless nothing-burger. It's been proven beyond any doubt that the only known effective method of mitigating spam on a decentralized system is to force users to pay to use bandwidth. That's it. The fee is the filter, as they say. Honestly it's one of the big reasons why I find Hive so interesting because we outsourced that cost into a derivative called resource credits that replenishes itself quickly. We've yet to see how that would play out at scale (I'm guessing it would be weird).
So they want to make a "temporary" soft fork... don't worry guys it's not permanent it will only last a year! Said every permanent governance change uttered by a politician here in the real world. In any case...
Luke Dashjr assures everyone this is not a hardfork and there will be no other token, but then publishes a post making the absolutely ludicrous claim that rejecting BIP-110 is actually a hardfork. That is some absolute next-level metal gymnastics. Color me impressed. I can only assume that this fabled creator of Knots fully understands that this is going to fail just like all the other things he's done and failed. Now he butters up his following for a hardfork in the weirdest of ways. The classic, "NO YOU" toddler approach.
There's no way this situation doesn't end with a hardfork. Everyone following the schizo fundamentalist Roman Catholic will make a big fuss about being the "Real Bitcoin" while the rest of us will continue on with our lives not really caring one way or another except for the airdrop. Thus far this group certainly believes this will not lead to a hardfork, and I do wonder how many will defect when it does. Guess we'll find out.
Another weird thing that I was reminded of today is that October 10th wasn't just the peak of the bull market, but was also the day that Core V30 (the Bitcoin patch that started this entire debate) was launched. Coincidence? BIP-110 supporters would claim that it's Core's fault that the bull market came to a screeching halt, but is that just a self-fulfilling prophecy coming from disillusioned long term holders?
And also... if V30 was the top signal does that mean that this softfork could be the bottom signal? Weird how the timelines are adding up and injecting themselves almost perfectly into the four year cycle that Bitcoin seems to follow.
https://x.com/adam3us/status/2075884851794735602
This long ass post by Adam Back tries to be reasonable, but unfortunately you can't really reason with brainwashed zealots that have been triggered this hard to "hate shitcoins" no matter what. Here are some of the highlights:
I hate spam with a passion...
Big argument being made by the BIP110 crowd is that anyone who tollorates Core loves spam.
Legit nobody likes spam.
You just tolerate it because decentralization is more important.
People seem upset about the default op return policy change in bitcoin. I will just assert, there are extremely robust and simple reasons for bitcoin changing default relay policy, and most just didn't do their research
This is the main point of contention and why all this started.
By allowing the op_return to be larger it allows the data to exist in a place that nodes can prune and effectively delete without breaking blockchain consensus. Only full nodes that don't prune would have to store that data forever. Before Core v30 the op_return limit was breached regardless of the relay policy so it made sense for the policy to reflect the usage that was already happening.
Also important to note that the Bitcoin network itself never had a limit on the op_return ever. It was only the policy of nodes to refuse to relay that information if it was over X amount. A miner who directly mines a block could put anything they wanted to in a block (which has happened many times with MARA mining pool).
So that lack of understanding lends itself to shared build-up of false narratives.
Top brass for the softfork push keep on latching to propaganda-like narratives like "protect the children" and "shitcoins bad". The truth doesn't seem to matter and there's a lot of misinformation out there. Rather than try to learn the workings of the protocol many often try to discredit core as a compromised entity (and maybe that's true but that's hardly the point and essentially a distraction from the issue).
Hardcore Bitcoiner Plebs are having a very very hard time understanding that Bitcoin is for everyone. And that means that anyone can use it, even people you hate for reasons you don't agree with. Deal with it. No one gets to have their cake and eat it too. Decentralization Demands.
