whoa....

The argument that should be made is the economic one which is: "this spam is making running a bitcoin node and sending a bitcoin transaction more expensive; and that is against the users interest."

Problem with knots supporters is that they are over selling the effect of running knots. It's potentially demoralizing or further radicalizing those users in a direction that's not productive; rather than being transparent and honest with them and just communicating something like: "hey this is an imperfect solution; it's not the end of bitcoin when there is spam on the bitcoin block chain, but that we have to keep pushing in this direction to do everything in our power to mitigate spam/scams."

The relationship between bitcoin versus regulators / law-enforcement, is far more nuanced than saying: "If somebody does something illegal on Bitcoin, then unbounded criminal liability attaches to everyone who's running a node or mining bitcoin." https://youtu.be/ET4vPRuE-yI?

https://youtu.be/ET4vPRuE-yI? More Pierre

bruh https://primal.net/e/

Still stacking. Work to avoid force selling. Produce something valuable. Real superpower is enjoying your work along the way.

We've never had a better bitcoin community/team/set of contributors...... the code-base is in better shape than it's ever been; I would only point to abot two lines of code that I disagree with: the data-carrier size default, or even that it exists. You could have two thoughts at the same time: 1.) this was an *optics* mistake + not handled correctly; and 2.) there is no better alternative (to core). I don't think the governance in knots is inherently better than the governance over core.

really since 2021 top

A split can only persist when/if MAJOR exchanges list both *coins* Who decides the names? BTC_OP_R83 BTC_OP BTC_NO_OP

More AI: " **Driving User Activation (UASF):** * A contentious soft fork can become "User-Activated" (UASF). This means **economic nodes (exchanges, wallets, payment processors) pre-commit to enforcing the new rules by a specific date, regardless of miner signaling.** * This creates immense pressure on miners to follow, as mining blocks rejected by the dominant economic ecosystem is economically irrational. The 2017 SegWit activation (BIP 148) is a prime example where economic node commitment drove miner adoption."

And just like that new inflation target is 3%. Feels *normal*, even low. Get ready for them to normalize 4%, then 5% then double digit..... Buy Bitcoin

Who is jailed? - devs? all devs or just 1-2? - node running who forwarded Tx data as ones and zeros, without "looking at it" -miner who archived Tx to the time-chain? How about the human creator of the CSAM in meat-space, the person who made the image/video, then paid to get it mined? Lets just send all of those people to the wood-chipper. IMHO intent is everything in these very theoretical scenarios

For heart transplants the young organ developes coronary arteries disease at an accelerated rate. Thought to be in large part due to the immune system *attacking* the heart as foreign.

Conflict is really about: What gives bitcoin its value? 1. ✅payments network (left for BCash/Alts) 2. ✅utility = smart contracts (some fled to ETH, some stayed/returned to BTC) 3. ✅store of value = cash There is still mixture of the #2/#3 *camps* whom all hold a lot of coin. They have slightly different views about what changes to policy or consensus should be prioritized. This is the conflict.

Bull Run starts when we reclaim 40oz/BTC

+ one