2026-02-20T23:18:01Z https://njump.me MinstrelKnight https://njump.me/npub1y4cpuyd7g7ufwulgyeunu2fjrmgrs7uxm6qnceu6qqvd47c6f8cqw2pz8m https://njump.me/nevent1qqswne82hphymwh9r7dcy56tu476pvdch09hvvkf9rkuz7f6l3kmzrszyqjhq8s3herm39mnaqn8j03fxg0dqwrmsm0gz0r8ngqp3khmrfylqmvvprt In reply to <a href='/nevent1qqsy42han95880749ykdul4ackgtxsc4gqa4u7ysmxe4afghjdfp2qgy2tyrz'>nevent1q…tyrz</a><br/>_________________________<br/><br/>If decentralization is not important, you can scale to your hearts desire.<br/>Then the question becomes why do you even need blockchain? Why not simply use a centralized system that scales much better. <br/><br/> 2026-05-29T08:21:13Z https://njump.me/nevent1qqstwm344xtjh0ew8v58wyq9a7rcrc5tyun8ce55grdqaelw0u6l8wszyqjhq8s3herm39mnaqn8j03fxg0dqwrmsm0gz0r8ngqp3khmrfylq4s0rrt In reply to <a href='/nevent1qqs8qhyc0qqk2egvsw08dlvvnlk0quzktl5h9d7kakgepne9xs86lsqp99mhxue69uhhqunfd46hxtnwdaehgu339e3k7mf00f6kcafdv3ukuctddukhyctkv4hqudardx'>nevent1q…ardx</a><br/>_________________________<br/><br/>That&#39;s all great, but the issue is the hardware requirements to run Solana node.<br/>If you want to be truly decentralized then you need to have nodes as light as possible so that anyone can run them.<br/>Solana node is out of reach for any individual. <br/><br/> 2026-05-24T18:50:27Z https://njump.me/nevent1qqsxlygtwclha6ljt76ad2yndgtz5d0mj6pmdgqcc297app3mjyu8jgzyqjhq8s3herm39mnaqn8j03fxg0dqwrmsm0gz0r8ngqp3khmrfylqxjkm78 In reply to <a href='/nevent1qqszgr28e8tctzfvnv36cw7y7umjz3j3rsc6tvc5325fxjd4zj3pheqpzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhg4s3rzn'>nevent1q…3rzn</a><br/>_________________________<br/><br/>There is so many things you said that are just plain wrong and it awfully reminds me of what this guy said:<br/><a href="https://x.com/VitalikButerin/status/929808394487320577">https://x.com/VitalikButerin/status/929808394487320577</a> <br/><br/> 2026-02-28T10:17:26Z https://njump.me/nevent1qqsywr3qghxm78ket0h7e0ncsed7263ma84lkx3hctzgnwcyhevh9jszyqjhq8s3herm39mnaqn8j03fxg0dqwrmsm0gz0r8ngqp3khmrfylqt4w5vy In reply to <a href='/nevent1qqsy2aks0tfrys73k7dyrwvjd9lhrx2ktsepkuejj23735dths62jwq9m38pl'>nevent1q…38pl</a><br/>_________________________<br/><br/>Sorry, I was trying to use the bridge analogy to describe spam effects on the Blockchain and obviously didn&#39;t do a good job 🙂<br/><br/>What I meant to say was when spam gets into the blockchain it bloats utxo set and the the size in a harmful way. Some of the spam generates unspendable utxos that need to be kept forever and the size od the blocks consisting of financial transaction is generally much smaller then a block with spam transactions.<br/>I tried to poorly describe this by saying that spam cargo is insecure as in parts of it fall of the truck and stay on the bridge.<br/><br/>The facts are spam is determental to utxo set and chain size whether you or I like it or not.<br/><br/>In afditiom, BIP 110 doesn&#39;t decide who gets to cross the bridge based on the cargo content, but the cargo size. <br/><br/> 2026-02-24T09:00:40Z https://njump.me/nevent1qqs2g0zpw9l2e758z4cq8qd27j2kfr6pey4dgy2cxxfmv644ga0xt0czyqjhq8s3herm39mnaqn8j03fxg0dqwrmsm0gz0r8ngqp3khmrfylqf4gpqa In reply to <a href='/nevent1qqsrenrsrjqsyj57pz09udygxnyqhn69ck3zmvsrlxl7r4nqvhx37yskldzmh'>nevent1q…dzmh</a><br/>_________________________<br/><br/>I&#39;d say BIP 110 kicks off the ones whose cargo is not secure and could fall off to the bridge and stay there once they are gone, if you know what I mean.<br/><br/>I have non-issue with high fees and BIP 110 has nothing to do with them. <br/><br/> 2026-02-23T18:32:35Z https://njump.me/nevent1qqsf5qykyyn9fyfc64xfmjwhk70zw9rn88l33eq3lj83xncvqtal9hszyqjhq8s3herm39mnaqn8j03fxg0dqwrmsm0gz0r8ngqp3khmrfylqndqyjx In reply to <a href='/nevent1qqsgpu7v7wtrjm37psyt3ggznrwea9y3skzqxcsx3yf2pwu4k4hzlfgpzemhxue69uhky6t5vdhkjmn9wgh8xmmrd9skccze2km'>nevent1q…e2km</a><br/>_________________________<br/><br/>Fair point for OP_RETURN being pushed at consensus level from policy.<br/><br/>Fees are not solution for spam, otherwise we would not have such a big increase in UTXO set and chain size. Fees influence how fast will your transaction be included in the block, they don&#39;t determine if your transaction is valid.<br/><br/>Spam comes and goes because it&#39;s worthless scam, but the bloat stays forever. <br/><br/>It makes you wonder why are spammers pushing to have their spam on BTC. Maybe because it&#39;s the most decentralized network and will store their spam forever?<br/>The irony is that with enough spam, the node will become increasingly harder to run, reducing the number of nodes and decentralization effectively making BTC the same as other networks.<br/><br/>So we can debate and theorize here what is spam, what is Bitcoin even, but reality doesn&#39;t care about our opinions. It&#39;s happening right before our eyes. <br/><br/> 2026-02-23T18:29:31Z https://njump.me/nevent1qqs9ukd3ht6hjqtw9gq050kcy6839mrvvksxql4npwml4pmp7kt803gzyqjhq8s3herm39mnaqn8j03fxg0dqwrmsm0gz0r8ngqp3khmrfylq7tpeug In reply to <a href='/nevent1qqsgpu7v7wtrjm37psyt3ggznrwea9y3skzqxcsx3yf2pwu4k4hzlfgpzemhxue69uhky6t5vdhkjmn9wgh8xmmrd9skccze2km'>nevent1q…e2km</a><br/>_________________________<br/><br/>Fair point for OP_RETURN being pushed at consensus level from policy.<br/><br/>Fees are not solution for spam, otherwise we would not have such a big increase in UTXO set and chain size. Fees influence how fast will your transaction be included in the block, they don&#39;t determine if your transaction is valid.<br/><br/>Spam comes and goes because it&#39;s worthless scam, but the bloat stays forever. <br/><br/>It makes you wonder why are spammers pushing to have their spam on BTC. Maybe because it&#39;s the most decentralized network and will store their spam forever?<br/>The irony is that with enough spam, the node will become increasingly harder to run, reducing the number of nodes and decentralization effectively making BTC the same as other networks.<br/><br/>So we can debate and theorize here what is spam, what is Bitcoin even, but reality doesn&#39;t care about our opinions. It&#39;s happening right before our eyes. <br/><br/> 2026-02-23T18:27:59Z https://njump.me/nevent1qqsts4evs6e3msrmgy2kvk44n520urq9lmt46cr3gt5t29vnrjh72eqzyqjhq8s3herm39mnaqn8j03fxg0dqwrmsm0gz0r8ngqp3khmrfylqqj9983 In reply to <a href='/nevent1qqsgpu7v7wtrjm37psyt3ggznrwea9y3skzqxcsx3yf2pwu4k4hzlfgpzemhxue69uhky6t5vdhkjmn9wgh8xmmrd9skccze2km'>nevent1q…e2km</a><br/>_________________________<br/><br/>Fair point that OP_RETURN is being brought to consensus from policy, but it still doesn&#39;t change the fact that BIP 110 doesn&#39;t descriminate per data type, but per data size.<br/><br/>It would be great if the fees were a way to limit spam, but they are not. Fees decide how fast a transaction will get included in the block, not if it&#39;s valid. <br/>If fees could limit spam, we would not have such a big increase in utxo set and blockchain size since 2023, roughly when gamified spam (Inscriptions , BRC-20, Runes, etc.) started.<br/><br/>What incentive does a node have to relay and store spam? Unless a node runner wants to spam in which case why not use another chain that does this much better and is not hostile to it? <br/>Maybe because Bitcoin network is truly decentralized and there is value in storing something on it forever, which cannot be said for any other chain. If that&#39;s true, the irony is that with more and more spam, the utxo set and the chain size will increase to levels that nodes will be increasingly hard to run, decreasing decentralization until Bitcoin becomes just like other chains.<br/>Spam comes and goes because it&#39;s worthless, not because fees stoped it. But the utxo bloat and increased chain size stay forever.<br/><br/>So we can debate here what is spam, what is the purpose of Bitcoin and pretend that fees are going to stop spam, but reality doesn&#39;t care about what we think. It&#39;s happening right before our eyes. <br/><br/> 2026-02-23T17:30:09Z https://njump.me/nevent1qqs0lmw3z74fhwe9qreg8x4q2986s8q50luz8h0exev9fxl9kqfgyeczyqjhq8s3herm39mnaqn8j03fxg0dqwrmsm0gz0r8ngqp3khmrfylqqcqfud In reply to <a href='/nevent1qqstmlchuk9yruhzvxnql26u2hlrh7znqr7c6pg2a5gq7uhlk5x64eg7fqqzl'>nevent1q…qqzl</a><br/>_________________________<br/><br/>You can treat white paper as the specification that was used to implement the protocol through code. Of course you won&#39;t find mention of money or cash in the code, it&#39;s C++. <br/><br/> 2026-02-23T12:51:43Z https://njump.me/nevent1qqsrgqj3h7nkjam5234t77cpv2jgfzsnkffmcx0k9zgpzel8yc3wv5qzyqjhq8s3herm39mnaqn8j03fxg0dqwrmsm0gz0r8ngqp3khmrfylqnd4wl2 In reply to <a href='/nevent1qqszm39gqfs0llahnf4chjj9nkfrc538sft0ad0aynlg79wy425qs6cprdmhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuumwdae8gtnnda3kjctv8g6nwm23dee'>nevent1q…3dee</a><br/>_________________________<br/><br/>Yes! By codifing the threshold for data size (cargo size) we ensure the protocol (bridge) survives!<br/>I fully agree this should not be changed at the whim of any traveler and it is regretfull that it was changed by unintended consequences of upgrading the protocol (bridge), so let&#39;s bring it to where it was. <br/><br/> 2026-02-23T12:48:25Z https://njump.me/nevent1qqs87dfnw2g88fuqc950ls7ekrdrffvny0k20nhn8msudwpv677yn9qzyqjhq8s3herm39mnaqn8j03fxg0dqwrmsm0gz0r8ngqp3khmrfylq4ptrde In reply to <a href='/nevent1qqspxvqu9cgfkhcsj57j2sumd9yrzk8acj49tq2nr4zgyyshl2lsv9cef534w'>nevent1q…534w</a><br/>_________________________<br/><br/>Per my response to Fox trot&#39;s bridge analogy, BIP doesn&#39;t have an opinion of the data type, only the size. Same as bridge doesn&#39;t have an opinion on cargo, only the size of the cargo. <br/><br/> 2026-02-23T12:43:22Z https://njump.me/nevent1qqsgpd66sl5xra5cezw982xqcnsahfcupzhnnsph7g2cm003u4mfxdszyqjhq8s3herm39mnaqn8j03fxg0dqwrmsm0gz0r8ngqp3khmrfylq6hk2ll In reply to <a href='/nevent1qqsy6nzmuvzjnu0zytuu7lllqv5hjfv07n6sm9cyxxv70tysx9dq0fs2flmxy'>nevent1q…lmxy</a><br/>_________________________<br/><br/>Yes, the bridge is a good analogy. You rightly say it doesn&#39;t care about the type of cargo, only the load. This is exactly what BIP 110 proposes. It doesn&#39;t distinguish between the type of data (cargo), only the load (data size).<br/>Currently the load is too much for the bridge, so it puts a constraint that was already present on the sign in front of the bridge about max weight (mempoool policy op_return limit) to keep the bridge from collapsing. <br/><br/> 2026-02-23T12:37:23Z https://njump.me/nevent1qqsgcxnzcsytef7ce44y2qrgy48n0jquqhuf5gj9nu3acsdguxpagaqzyqjhq8s3herm39mnaqn8j03fxg0dqwrmsm0gz0r8ngqp3khmrfylqn8zf6a In reply to <a href='/nevent1qqsq5cj0qp52fngf2y3jhxrvc8042mdrurw4rz7y6kr9gv0qmk96dxsjtyr7u'>nevent1q…yr7u</a><br/>_________________________<br/><br/>But it does describe what it is. Right at the beginning, the title: Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System<br/>It doesn&#39;t say distributed data ledger for any kind of data, it&#39;s quite specific. <br/><br/> 2026-02-23T12:28:35Z https://njump.me/nevent1qqsyrwn66hywkfrq27r8hjvhha7gj4g2vhxpv7qxnhe0lf2hh66wl6czyqjhq8s3herm39mnaqn8j03fxg0dqwrmsm0gz0r8ngqp3khmrfylqxnfkn6 In reply to <a href='/nevent1qqsv34xklsvzfu6nrdgkcmlxk9lpd43mjfjjyr7vudhwgmywald79zgy69367'>nevent1q…9367</a><br/>_________________________<br/><br/>I beg to differ. If you start from first principles that Bitcoin is money, than that is your standard.<br/>You can call it nostalgia, but the protocol as a set of rules describes BTC as a network that keeps the ledger of Sats moving around. It doesn&#39;t describe it as a ledger of any kind of data.<br/><br/>Maybe this is not the greatest analogy, but if someone comes to a chess tournament and wants to play checkers, they should not expect the tournament to turn chess into checkers. We can choose to pretend that we don&#39;t know what chess is and it&#39;s politics dressed as engineering to try and keep the rules, but that doesn&#39;t make sense to me.<br/><br/>At the end of the day, we have ample examples of other chains that did that like Eth, Sol, Ada etc. They are not examples we should follow to say the least. <br/><br/> 2026-02-23T09:59:29Z https://njump.me/nevent1qqs8r8slczetrmtrp0r0g94g8vrwlj3s259f8zmwypdxr5cd74c4srczyqjhq8s3herm39mnaqn8j03fxg0dqwrmsm0gz0r8ngqp3khmrfylqq6r6n6 In reply to <a href='/nevent1qqs2ztzeyck69rudvtz078p4auaxre27pzmcrhzs0sqm85lqu2t47wcmen3hs'>nevent1q…n3hs</a><br/>_________________________<br/><br/>Think about how would you choose the limit. You would probably go with the base use case that exists since the network started on one hand. On the other hand, you would look at the examples like Inscriptions, BRC-20, Runes and so fourth. Based on that, you would choose a limit that just about enables former, but disables later.<br/>You don&#39;t really think of what is later, it&#39;s just that you want to keep only the former.<br/>Hope it makes sense. <br/><br/> 2026-02-23T09:30:09Z https://njump.me/nevent1qqs08sfjs93qgffkq3g3e53h20y8zxj65k9nxj6g0jt067ud3k7pdugzyqjhq8s3herm39mnaqn8j03fxg0dqwrmsm0gz0r8ngqp3khmrfylqcrn8lm In reply to <a href='/nevent1qqs9x9t8rpjrenxjn53cprkj7d2ctyggj99dfhqmxtxlta8k3cqucxgpzemhxue69uhky6t5vdhkjmn9wgh8xmmrd9skc6nsrw7'>nevent1q…srw7</a><br/>_________________________<br/><br/>You are missing out one critical thing. BIP 110 criteria for filtering is the size of data, not type. <br/><br/> 2026-02-23T08:56:02Z https://njump.me/nevent1qqsxsjyp87hqvfqkzfqs5e8m884r2ckpvm79zcsw37q2nz7uc4r2k8gzyqjhq8s3herm39mnaqn8j03fxg0dqwrmsm0gz0r8ngqp3khmrfylqcc5s9s In reply to <a href='/nevent1qqstnapzs58a53r2e49d7c0catgu74y9a358x6gul0m57puc8z6gtlqlk66ga'>nevent1q…66ga</a><br/>_________________________<br/><br/>Nothing wrong with what Andreas said, but don&#39;t forget we are talking about Bitcoin transactions. Moving Sats without a third party.<br/>Peer to peer electronic cash.<br/>Unless you believe Bitcoin transactions can be anything, not just moving Sats. They can be moving other tokens (BRC-20) or inscriptions. While we are at it, why don&#39;t we ditch all the rules, because someone will eventually have a use case that is prohibited by the rules and will call us dictators that love to censor.<br/><br/>BTC is a protocol (set of rules) whose implementation (Core, Knots, Libre Relay, etc.) node runners choose to run to enforce the rules of the protocol. Let&#39;s not pretend there are no rules that need to be enforced.<br/><br/>It&#39;s like someone comes to a chess tournament, wants to play checkers and then complains about dictatorship because they were pointed to a fact that this is a chess tournament. <br/><br/> 2026-02-21T19:38:16Z https://njump.me/nevent1qqsyfcrjm7c4ds3pynvc8u3l0ke9wp64z5ewhh4ux5fq2sqt2yh9pdgzyqjhq8s3herm39mnaqn8j03fxg0dqwrmsm0gz0r8ngqp3khmrfylqvul2te In reply to <a href='/nevent1qqs2ccfhlpym5pwkpf38vu8hmy76kvpj67kdee0t0nsmrpu9cl05nqcncsn5k'>nevent1q…sn5k</a><br/>_________________________<br/><br/>Saying that BIP 110 is not going to stop spam unfortunately shows you did not even bothered to read what it is supposed to do - <a href="https://bip110.org/">https://bip110.org/</a><br/><br/>It is not supposed to stop spam as nothing can completely stop it. Instead, it is shutting down known technics to embedd spam that should have been done by Core a long time ago.<br/>It also sends a message that the network is hostile to these kind of exploits.<br/><br/>The purpose is to stop gamified spam done on large scale by businesses that we&#39;re build on top of the exploits. It&#39;s really not a problem if individuals find a complex and convoluted way embedd spam from time to time.<br/><br/>Also, what it&#39;s about ego and control for Luke and Mechanic?<br/>As in their implementation of Bitcoin protocol will be dominant?<br/>Like Core is now?<br/>Does that mean that Core controls Bitcoin then? <br/><br/> 2026-02-20T22:52:52Z