We already undestood that you are a Moron.

If you suggest killing civilians is justified (which you do), as the PSYCHO Todd is doing, you are the same disgusting piece of shit with fucked up logics. GFY

GM

GM

Fucking disgusting. It was already know that WEF are globalist disgusting warmonger anti-human pedo scum but now that too ...

Both are needed. Bitcoin being Freedom Money needs to be medium of exchange to free the people (LN) and store of value as well to store the value of everyones energy and labor in a way that can't be debased, inflated or stolen in any way. That way Bitcoin will liberate the housing market (and other markets too) that is used as a store of value and prices have become ubearable for citizens. (that is just one example and the rabbit whole is very deep)

The propaganda is a strong tool and when it comes form previously trusted party like Core it does a lot of damage. Some people just trust blindly and do not assess the actions, what about looking for the effects ahead in time as you point out that Bitcoin is a long road 🤙

Both parts are with misinformative conclusions but that is just their way to see their own false reality. On the first part he is saying about "army of botnets and gaming PCs mining" and "The egalitarian difference is clear here" but conviniently forgetting about the army of Bitcoin BitAxes and how every Bitcoiner Pleb can buy a BitAxe miner that is cheaper than a gaming pc and mine with DATUM and their own templates. This is egalitarian. On the second part, every time criminals are arrested after Monero leaks, they say that the criminals have been stupid and used Monero in the wrong way or wrong setup ... which is his conclusion about LN privacy that it depends on setup ... Anyway.

Long Live https://thepiratebay.org

Exactly. Mecahnic revealed well all Tone's false claims and incoherence. Tone is just badly brainwashed and that is why he did not even touch on what BIP110 is doing and why and how.

Ask him.

Tone being incoherent and retarded on stage ¯\_(•_•)_/¯

There are a fair number of people who support it and that number will grow because BIP110 makes good sense for Bitcoin being Freedom Money and not arbitrary data / jpegs dump.

Running BIP110 on Bitcoin Knots because Bitcoin is Freedom Money 🤙 https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/2017#pullrequestreview-3384767316 "I'm generally supportive of the changes in this BIP. Aside from minor nitpicks in language, the 34 byte scriptPubKey restriction I think will prove to be quite valuable in addressing the larger concern of DoS blocks / poison blocks that impose such high computational costs on nodes that a single block would take 30 minutes to verify on decent hardware instead of taking about a second. This is an even larger threat to Bitcoin than either CSAM or quantum, because I've read that CSAM has already been present on Bitcoin for a very long time, and quantum computers aren't anywhere near good enough to be a threat, and may never be, whereas DoS blocks could be introduced by miners who take direct submissions without sufficient checks at any time. It's been pointed out that disabling OP_SUCCESS in Tapscript would conflict with adding new signature verification opcodes in future BIPs that might use them to add quantum resistance, but I would point out that the semantics around existing opcodes could simply be altered to preserve compatibility with BIP 110. For example, instead of creating new sets of OP_CHECKSIG opcodes to support new signature schemes, the semantics of existing OP_CHECKSIG opcode could simply be adjusted to accept imperatively inputs of varying lengths, a form of overloading / polymorphism / or duck typing. While it could be argued that a more declarative approach is superior in cryptographic contexts, I don't weight that concern as heavily as the larger concern over DoS blocks, and as such, I'm supportive of this approach. My only major objection is that this is temporary. I'm not very comfortable with either temporary soft forks or default node expiry because it forces users to act instead of delaying action, which I think delaying action is perfectly fine and reasonable as the protocol matures. It also reminds me too much of the "difficulty bomb" based monetary policy used to coerce Ethereum miners to adopt new code from the Ethereum foundation or else. That said, if BIP 110 were activated as is, I would still be supportive, and I would also support reactivating it in the future as a more permanent feature of Bitcoin. At a high level, this proposal reminds me in spirit of early versions of my original P2QRH proposal. I just think it could use a little more polish, but I see it as being directionally correct."

Tell this to the compromised Core devs. Some of that they already cited.