And with that, BIP110 chain looks to be dead in the water. T...

Dikaios1517

npub1kun5628raxpm7usdkj62z2337hr77f3ryrg9cf0vjpyf4jvk9r9smv3lhe

hex

df99347427b019f3216e37d8930665198b4f54ee053965972a3937926be325ad

nevent

nevent1qqsdlxf5wsnmqx0ny9hr0kynqej3nz602nhq2wt9ju4rjdujd03jttgprpmhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuem4d36kwatvw5hx6mm9qgstwf6d9r37nqalwgxmfd9p9gclt3l0yc3jp5zuyhkfqjy6extz3jcswh5yp

Kind-1 (TextNote)

2026-08-09T05:31:11Z

And with that, BIP110 chain looks to be dead in the water. Two whole blocks, both by the same sub-pool of miners under OCEAN, until they saw the writing on the wall and called it quits, though "not defeat" somehow.

https://relay.brightbolt.net/5605f814f93f4a108f9f0303a5bf9bda713d18d45ee38fd9fbe22a2549635c19.webp

https://relay.brightbolt.net/219c2d7c76734d317105ff37ab6402bfa9d2e9794882267cce9e6e8c7eb93ed5.webp

Sorry guys. I was sympathetic with the idea of placing reasonable limits on spam on Bitcoin, but you failed hard at winning hearts and minds to your cause, and then stubbornly decided "we're going to do it anyway, because game theory!"

It didn't work out. Changing Bitcoin is hard, and should be. 20% of nodes is not consensus. 80% of nodes not doing anything is not "indifference." Many of us stayed on Core or pre-RDTS versions of Knots as a specific choice against changing what is considered a valid block, and mining pools went with that majority.

Heck, even many OCEAN miners went with that majority, as evidenced by block 961634. OCEAN couldn't even achieve consensus among its "own ranks" and yet expected to game-theory it into existence among the rest of node-runners and miners? That was some next-level optimism.

Raw JSON

{
  "kind": 1,
  "id": "df99347427b019f3216e37d8930665198b4f54ee053965972a3937926be325ad",
  "pubkey": "b7274d28e3e983bf720db4b4a12a31f5c7ef262320d05c25ec90489ac99628cb",
  "created_at": 1786253471,
  "tags": [
    [
      "client",
      "JANK"
    ]
  ],
  "content": "And with that, BIP110 chain looks to be dead in the water. Two whole blocks, both by the same sub-pool of miners under OCEAN, until they saw the writing on the wall and called it quits, though \"not defeat\" somehow.\n\nhttps://relay.brightbolt.net/5605f814f93f4a108f9f0303a5bf9bda713d18d45ee38fd9fbe22a2549635c19.webp\n\nhttps://relay.brightbolt.net/219c2d7c76734d317105ff37ab6402bfa9d2e9794882267cce9e6e8c7eb93ed5.webp\n\nSorry guys. I was sympathetic with the idea of placing reasonable limits on spam on Bitcoin, but you failed hard at winning hearts and minds to your cause, and then stubbornly decided \"we're going to do it anyway, because game theory!\"\n\nIt didn't work out. Changing Bitcoin is hard, and should be. 20% of nodes is not consensus. 80% of nodes not doing anything is not \"indifference.\" Many of us stayed on Core or pre-RDTS versions of Knots as a specific choice against changing what is considered a valid block, and mining pools went with that majority.\n\nHeck, even many OCEAN miners went with that majority, as evidenced by block 961634. OCEAN couldn't even achieve consensus among its \"own ranks\" and yet expected to game-theory it into existence among the rest of node-runners and miners? That was some next-level optimism.",
  "sig": "e349851e0c2db929cf859b5de95fac8f2ea04ca8e16945472cda8e244e64e0c44c3561bab23b0bb309e366bafc76700c49b3ae8493e9114d4c03d6c54592fb99"
}