Nostr Archives

1) What.

💬 110 replies

Replies (50)

The permission the network extends is defined by what is consensus valid. No additional permission is necessary. That's what consensus rules ARE. Otherwise, there would have needed to be permission to add lightning, permission to add coinjoins, permission to add submarine swaps... The network treats all consensus valid bits as equal, in keeping with cypherpunk net neutrality principles. By all means, if you actually can come up with a way to make monetary bits consensus valid and non-monetary bits not, all ears. But no, BIP-110 does not achieve that, nor do I believe it to actually be possible. That's where mempool policy and block template creation come into play, and where the matter should have rested.

000

AU991313d ago

Your cucumber example means nothing because with data, it could be encrypted. For example it could be an encrypted message saying "march rent".

0000 sats

Psilocyberbull12d ago

And theres no reason an encrypted message saying anything should take up more than a hundred bytes that need to be stored and verified by every node forever. Your response didnt even make sense for what you were responding to lmao. Have you synced a node recently? These nebulous NoN mOnEtArY transactions have a very real effect

0000 sats

Neal12d ago

function is not mysterious and is observable; that’s the point. sending UTXOs communicates value, which is monetary. I don’t give a fuck what is in arbitrary data, it’s arbitrary, discretionary, ie means nothing, and is valid under consensus right now. any function of arbitrary data is non-monetary. it’s attached to a monetary transaction. it’s a denial of one’s rational faculty to say “who is to say what is monetary” furthermore, that logical misstep costs one the concept of truth itself. it’s a head first dive into epestimic nihilism, and possibly the greatest performative contradiction anyone could make.

0000 sats

Neal12d ago

the point of the cucumber example is upon you becuase you are fixating on particular content and completely miss the principles in play. it doesn’t matter what is encrypted or not encrypted in arbitrary data. it’s the category, the function, the essence

0000 sats

AU991313d ago

No I don't, show me one. It's fun arguing this bc the Knotzis think I'm a spammer and the core-munists think I'm a Luke acolyte. I actually think neither side has a fully flushed out argument

0000 sats

BitcoinIsFuture12d ago

📝 4448b3fd… 📝 6368f769…

0000 sats

BitcoinIsFuture12d ago

https://blockspaceweekly.substack.com/p/issue-3-three-yea…

0000 sats

AU991312d ago

You not being able to realize that that is just your opinion doesn't make it a fact. One mans "march rent" is another man's quantum encrypted guid list of items

0000 sats

Neal12d ago

🤦‍♂️ You think the difference between a UTXO and arbitrary data is “my opinion”? 🤣 can you tell the difference between an UTXO and arbitrary data? bitcoin knows the difference. is that, then bitcoin’s “opinion”? this is just principled thinking. it’s ok if your not good at it, it takes practice i believe in you you are already this far! keep going

0000 sats

Neal12d ago

both are arbitrary data 🤣 it literally doesn’t matter what is in it 🤣 could be full, empty, bible verse, a program, a jpeg. it’s all arbitrary stapled onto a sent UTXO

0000 sats

AU991312d ago

So 0 data should be included with transactions? Why not argue for that

0000 sats

Neal12d ago

because of trade offs. I would be fine with 0 arb data, because i have never had a need for it, nor do i ever anticipate i would need it. but i understand some find some utility for some arb data, so having consensus carve out a small space for arb data seems perfectly reasonable. but the larger and larger u make the area, the more surface area it introduces for potential harm, so i am against uncapping it. doesnt serve my interests. if you have the need for uncapped arb data, then run a node to build that consensus. my position is to signal your self serving interest, because that is how consumes us is made. if uncapped arb data is consensus, so be it. if 100kb is consensus, so be it if 0 is consensus, so be it. i trust the consensus process even if it doesn’t align with my self interest, because it’s a better answer than any of us individually could come up with. what worries me, is that people won’t serve their interests, and just parrot other people’s interest without any thinking. if every user is a sovereign individual, serving themselves, i trust consensus will find the collective good. if users are going to NPC themselves and copy paste others interests becuse they are too retarded to think on their own, we are fucked anyways

0000 sats

AU991312d ago

Yeah, so the network consensus is not to run knots so what does that signal?

0000 sats

Neal12d ago

you don’t know what consensus is… protocol consensus has nothing to do with implementation.

0000 sats

Psilocyberbull11d ago

You seem to be suffering from cognitive dissonance. The data shows otherwise, youre just saying things because you think they sound nice

0000 sats

Neal12d ago

I dont hate on spammers or “monetary maxis’s” i see the tension as a good thing, as long as the serve themselves. all moves are valid right now and consensus arbitrates what is valid but people saying they can’t define non monetary is non rational, absurd, retarded. or that working through consensus is an attack on bitcoin. it’s not correct or honest.

0000 sats

Neal12d ago

lol this retard doesnt conflate personal preference with protocol consensus 🤣

0000 sats

Neal12d ago

i don’t know why u are talking at all. its incoherent emoting and its not condescending to call people out you are tilting at windmills and it’s embarrassing

0000 sats

Psilocyberbull11d ago

Yea, and what was that percentage just a few months ago? Knots has surged from under 2% network share to over 20% in a very short amount of time, you seem to be willfully ignore that and trying to twist the data to fit your argument that you can barely even back

0000 sats