Absolutely, but whole foods tend to make you feel more full quicker. But if I was forced to say only ONE thing that would make an impact for health (weight loss for obese people), it would be whole foods.

Basically just eat whole foods 🤷

My take is, the soft fork proposal in itself doesn't stop them, but paves the way for future work that can get back at continuously challenging them. It does so by refocusing the collective bitcoin community signal of what is or is not encouraged. Thanks for a sober debate.

The fact that 110 doesnt fight spam more aggressively is exactly proof that it is not hostile, btw, and merely an attempt to revert back to a version respectful of bitcoins role as sound money, while giving us time to figure out how to move forward in a sustainable way. I think the community of bitcoiners collectively signalling to the world what data is encouraged and what data is discouraged is extremely important for the direction of the bitcoin experiment as a whole, and disregarding that, I think, is dangerous. We knoooow we want sound money. Attempting to restrict adjacent usecases is a protective mechanism that ensures the success of sound money rather than restricts the opportunities of those adjacent usecases. Sound money is just more important to mankind than the missed opportunity of that adjacent usecase. Agree or disagree?

This is a cop-out response, and doesn't answer my question, agree? Btw. I totally get it. Its not an easy debate. If knots is unsafe, I think bitcoin as a whole would benefit if you would help fix or at least point out any issues you encounter 🙏 maybe you've done that already, I dont know.

Again, thanks for adding nuance. I think your own wording is victim of your own bias, respectfully. "Any group deciding". Whatever technically goes in AND Whatever the protocol signals should go in Is arguably the common directive of bitcoiners as a community, you included. So if BIP110 is the signal, its also your signal If 100kb is the signal, its also your signal I agree completely, no group should decide. But thats the idea behind general consensus, both protocol consensus and social consensus. You, individually, choose to run core v19, so you are technically signalling some form of opinion. You also would recommend people run v30 (in due time, when v32 released) Are you comfortable recommending the average pleb to run software you think includes misguided changes?

Thanks for your response. Can I assume that this means you have no objection to the datacarriersize change in v30? (Or the way it was merged despite controversy)? If you'd add why you dont object that would be informative.

Once core 32 lands, what would be your recommendation to the average pleb?

Sorry, did you mistype 29 or wdym with 2 versions behind? You wrote v19.

This is not a bullseye post at all. I feel like you're on a noble mission - but I'll call you out when I see you support bad takes. Hope you'll take that constructively. I dont get the hate towards Odell. There is no way he is a bad actor. I personally feel he has approached the knots v core debate from a misguided angle, but that makes his take misguided, not a bad actor. Also, why even care that he "went back to twitter". He can do whatever he sees fit, and changing ones mind is perfectly healthy. Im sure I wouldnt see you bashinh any prominent anti-bip110 person changing their mind to support bip110 today fx.

Would you advise the general pleb to do that also or is that only because you're technically comfortable running older software which likely doesnt include some more/less important security/bug fixes?