GM☕

The ₿itcoin Artist

npub1w4j2y74wx24sckf7ymgnf3r4gp0yqd8huw8kzfyt2lj8lhmh7ujs75j067

hex

20a5125420bea53d80542750b6f96e7fb34831d3901a481600dedfba9eee5a7a

nevent

nevent1qqszpfgj2sstaffasp2zw59kl9h8lv6gx8feqxjgzcqdaha6nmh957sprpmhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuem4d36kwatvw5hx6mm9qgs82e9z02hr92cvtylzd5f5c365qhjqxnm78rmpyj940erlmamlwfgs555u6

Kind-1 (TextNote)

2026-08-31T06:58:26Z

GM☕

I think Bitcoin would be in a better spot if BIP-110 had activated with no fork, and I think it's principles were good.

I'd also guess that there was backroom dealings and pressure on the miners from "the big money" in Bitcoin.

But as much as I think this, Bitcoin as a whole did not agree.

I love Luke, but there is no black and white definition of what "consensus" is. And as much as I love the idea of nodes "being in charge", it is more complicated than that.

That doesn't mean nodes are irrelevant, and I don't mean to say the direction of centralization is ok. But as a whole, whatever "Bitcoin" is, it didn't bend to BIP-110.

So I now ride the fence.

Yes, I think there are serious problems with the legacy chain that are now worse because many of the people pushing back on "Big Bitcoin" have now left.

But also yes, I think the Core side was right on this point: We did fork off.

To find a silver lining in this (imo) bad situation, my solution is to hold both chains and think of it as another chance of fixing the money.

Have a great week.✌ https://blossom.primal.net/3a816c8c5bb8c47f8f48a48a2a0c7f54c786c762f92f0e9c629af25dc34f3989.png

Raw JSON

{
  "kind": 1,
  "id": "20a5125420bea53d80542750b6f96e7fb34831d3901a481600dedfba9eee5a7a",
  "pubkey": "7564a27aae32ab0c593e26d134c475405e4034f7e38f61248b57e47fdf77f725",
  "created_at": 1788159506,
  "tags": [
    [
      "r",
      "wss://purplepag.es/"
    ],
    [
      "r",
      "wss://relay.primal.net/"
    ],
    [
      "imeta",
      "url https://blossom.primal.net/3a816c8c5bb8c47f8f48a48a2a0c7f54c786c762f92f0e9c629af25dc34f3989.png",
      "m image/jpeg",
      "dim 1020x1542",
      "service nip96"
    ],
    [
      "client",
      "Primal Web"
    ]
  ],
  "content": "GM☕\n\nI think Bitcoin would be in a better spot if BIP-110 had activated with no fork, and I think it's principles were good.\n\nI'd also guess that there was backroom dealings and pressure on the miners from \"the big money\" in Bitcoin.\n\nBut as much as I think this, Bitcoin as a whole did not agree.\n\nI love Luke, but there is no black and white definition of what \"consensus\" is. And as much as I love the idea of nodes \"being in charge\", it is more complicated than that.\n\nThat doesn't mean nodes are irrelevant, and I don't mean to say the direction of centralization is ok. But as a whole, whatever \"Bitcoin\" is, it didn't bend to BIP-110.\n\nSo I now ride the fence.\n\nYes, I think there are serious problems with the legacy chain that are now worse because many of the people pushing back on \"Big Bitcoin\" have now left.\n\nBut also yes, I think the Core side was right on this point: We did fork off.\n\nTo find a silver lining in this (imo) bad situation, my solution is to hold both chains and think of it as another chance of fixing the money.\n\nHave a great week.✌\nhttps://blossom.primal.net/3a816c8c5bb8c47f8f48a48a2a0c7f54c786c762f92f0e9c629af25dc34f3989.png ",
  "sig": "5dd4f166943519dd7b3808018f8a194fd7fe792706aad68f114a3c4c9ae757c0da3e2ba540405aa1233c7c2367cd12696fdf07408e987f464bb875c18dbedad9"
}