I also like the YYYMMDD date style. I also like the full node subver string for Knots node cause it lets you know what its core base is (e.g. /Satoshi:29.1.0/Knots:20250903/) and the date time of the release.

Maybe try a next time?

You can ignore this question. It doesn’t make any sense in retrospect.

Can this Sparrow release be used with Frigate?

I guess that is ultimately the calculus in question. The risk seems to be normalization of the networking lowering the node defaults of `minrelaytxfee` and `incrementalrelayfee`. I suspect this would lead to lower long term fee rates. Maybe I’m wrong.

Update: I now see 4 out of 68 peers identifying as Knots. 7 of these peers are relaying sub 1 vbyte txs; that seems wild to me.

I wish there was more discourse on nostr about sub 1 sat per vbyte transactions being relayed and mined. Seems like bad long term thinking for mining pools. mostly dismissed it as mining pool economic ignorance on a recent WBD pod. I find it hard to believe mining pools aren’t considering the economic consequences.

My Bitcoin node currently has 73 peers. Only one of them is a Knots node. This is much lower than I expected.

A great summary of the core position as a whole