ExploreTrendingAnalytics
Nostr Archives
ExploreTrendingAnalytics
M-Vil13d ago
How can anyone not support Bip 110?? https://rumble.com/v75tyny-bitcoin-code-governance-jon-at…
πŸ’¬ 8 replies

Replies (8)

Jay13d ago
Because I know spam isn't a problem.
0000 sats
rev.hodl13d ago
It forks the network, this weakens Bitcoin.
0000 sats
Hanshan13d ago
more implementations is a strength. FOSS has always been this way. "weak" is having a single implementation governed by a single group of developers and having everyone terrified to fork because they fear fiat NGD.
0000 sats
rev.hodl12d ago
Yes, more implementations are good but bip110 is not an implementation it's a fork.
0000 sats
Hanshan12d ago
why is it necessary to have everybody agree on the chain history? the chain history only matters if we care about fiat denominated price and are jealous about what the "true chain" is. insisting everybody settle on a single chain is ridiculous anyway. the future is multi-chain.
0000 sats
M-Vil12d ago
Better to fork than remain hostage to bitcoin core terrorists
0000 sats
Zsubmariner12d ago
It doesn't "fork the network" in that sense. Forks of this kind are the normal and healthy way for us to tighten protocol constraints. Otherwise we would have to say "well, we can never fix the inscriptions hack or tighten up unnecessarily loose parameters that are getting abused". This is the process of rolling out changes that are just responsible maintenance. 110 will get enough signa from nodes, the miners will have no other rational choice than to come along. This is healthy. It's just the node runners way of say "no, we don't want to host your shitcoining spam. Nice try capturing woke devs and shoving through your shitcoinery, Citrea."
0000 sats
rev.hodl12d ago
The way I understand it, after a period time of not enough miner adoption, it will chain split off.
0000 sats