Bitcoin after BIP-110

Oh I Gotta tell you guys Bip 110 was a monumental waste of time You know, I think we spent all this time because we didn't like the fact that We're down here at 60k so we had to come up with subjects of conversation to you know to pass time um and keep us occupied and and especially not worry about the about the fact that we're down so much and that the four-year bros are actually You know on paper right so But I have to say the fact that these guys are out there trying to do a new proof of work coin and you know Having their own little secret meetings and stuff is it's sort of ridiculous I don't know I never signed up for that. I think it's a joke um, I don't know the whole thing is basically a month of just You know trying to debate whether it was gonna happen or not or You know the support and then finally they mine two blocks and that's that thing died in about an hour it was over Bitcoin ball Welcome to Bitcoin after bit 110 What's going on Fred? No much man Yeah, I think people just they don't like to take a loss like they tried They believed in what they believed in it didn't work out and they just don't want to give up I think people just are like to admit when they're wrong or something's not you know sufficient or you know works Well, I don't know I all admit it. I was uh I thought it had a shot. I mean, I didn't think it had a great shot I thought I had a shot and I also thought that the people The kind of the ring leaders would basically just throw in the towel But they didn't know they all took time off from their jobs at ocean mining and You know, they're all saying that you know this Bitcoin is now pedoclain. I don't know the whole thing is ridiculous And that it's an attack on true Bitcoin I don't know the whole thing is just It's it's somewhat insane These people are not serious people I gotta tell you Uh, I mean, I understand why people would be like hey look uh You know the pedo thing the Adam back, you know going to Epstein's island thing. It's all silliness like that's not relevant really to the discussion of spam and To the the future of the chain and the future of the you know Someone's ability to run a node and all that stuff That that was my concern with you know With Bitcoin in the direction it was headed and I just didn't want to see pumped up fun Being built on top of Bitcoin You know, that that's just not That that was what my ultimate fear was is just the You know Bitcoin eventually becoming something other than money and like some people I've talked to will be like Oh, well, you know Money still a use case, you know, it's like yeah, but You don't want you don't want other use cases on top of the main money chain, right? I mean, I'm an agreement. I mean, that's what I think the main the main You know, you don't want it. That's why I was four people in ten but I think that the The aftermath is sort of ridiculous, you know I mean, I don't know Right, but but like I think the reason they're forking off, you know, is because Chora's made it clear that they want it more than just money, right? It kind of reminds me of the The whole thing with the mega fallout right with America first and all that And I think what people are starting to realize is maybe we should be America only Right, we need people to say America only and with Bitcoin. It's like it needs to be money only It doesn't need to be anything else and I think that's what the the crux of the debate was I Hail I'm just like to say yeah good points Patrick, but For me like this whole bit 110 They had the best intentions. I honestly think they had the best intentions um It didn't go through it didn't reach support. Okay But what I really really disliked is When people got so upset at each other The day we're calling each other like idols and stuff like that it was It was beneath Bitcoin in my opinion Yeah, I agree with that, you know, I don't think name calling really solves anything You know now I will say that they tried to censor You know bit 110 for a very long time um and get up and And like unread it and like in all the The major forums and of course Twitter was uh or x As a free speech platform. So you know The bit 110ers were able to get the word out on that but I just don't think the the way they treated the whole thing was right um, you know just claiming that the bit 110ers just weren't technically savvy enough and they they Didn't understand bit coin and whatever Yeah at the same time these are the same people who Are we're part of the cold card fiasco and And they're the same people who are inviting people to conferences where they're sharing like shit coins Scams and trying to put a finity scams on top of Bitcoin and profiting off that like if you have a bunch of the finity scams on Bitcoin It's like it's over You know it it's not in the long run. It's not gonna survive if if that's the case and and you know them forking off who knows Maybe uh, it's like uh an escape boat on the Titanic and we just don't know it Yeah, I don't think the I don't think Bitcoin is a Titanic. I think the uh fiat system is a Titanic Yeah, the fiat system will definitely fail for sure Uh 100% I agree with that. I just you know um, I know the fiat system is also like a scared animal. They're Fighting back in any way they can and who's to say that they want it try to infiltrate core or I don't know um any entity to try to Newter Bitcoin and one way I see Bitcoin being neutered as if like it's not being used as actual money and there's all these other Little 1% use cases that are you know taking over the block space like That's me would not be good Yeah regarding fiat uh today I heard that It costs like 5 trillion dollars a year to run America And if you take all the wealth of the top and how many wealthiest people in America You would get 9 trillion So you would be able to run America with like blessed and for for less than two years Um with that money Now People who think that this is gonna stop it like You know 41 42 45 trillion Is so mistaken. It's not even well. It is funny to me, but that's just me um I would just like uh, you know to um to see more and more governments being open and about home How much uh they've stacked so far And what they're doing to obtain more And uh let's go on with the program That's what I think Yeah, you know, maybe I feel like it's uh they're gas lining us, you know You have all these representatives and in the government who are claiming to be pro Bitcoin and They moved the stable coins really quickly once they started getting a buy it on stage and Um the Bitcoin conferences turned into stablecoin conferences, you know pretty quickly there And I feel like that's the direction they're gonna go and I mean don't get me wrong They'll speak highly of Bitcoin as a great innovation and tool, but um they're not gonna You know optimize the tax code for for Bitcoin hovelers or or make it easier for Bitcoin to become like the money It's meant to be so Don't keep putting people on jail and and but then they'll still they'll still go up on conferences and And say we need your help, you know and and and making uh america the crypto capital of the world While we put people away at jail for for writing code Yeah, but look um China's been stacking on gold uh for quite a few years now I think they're the largest buyer So uh other countries are um well they Some held gold some don't even hold it anymore but But I'd like us so if stablecoins are are stepping stone towards us getting to a point where countries are not just ranked but talked to and Deal they're made based on how many Bitcoin they have So if stablecoins are stepping stones towards that So be it You know look Jamie diamond Jamie diamond is complete like super Against you know All of that stable Well He doesn't want to stablecoins either Yeah, not not just stablecoins. He started like kind of like talking about Bitcoin and let's say a positive way But yeah, look stablecoins. This is basically his business. It's just called a different way right? It's called it's called fiat Right so um obviously if you're going like That's like uh Telling a department in government. Hey you guys like there's 20 years ago 60 or 70% of you Oh We're you know we can we could have replaced 70% of you 20 years ago with software Okay, now you go to them and tell them hey these are the facts. Yeah, so uh be super efficient Of course, they're not gonna do that right like why would they kill their job? So the same goes with Jamie diamond because he cannot control this fiat He can play with it Like they've got deals with basically every single bank in the world when it comes to dollars right So his business is set there's very Few things that they can do to Kill that business for them with stablecoins. He cannot do anything. It's out of his control Yeah, I mean he has his own stablecoin Uh, I mean jp and work and they they have their own stablecoin in the works and that's just not Yeah, on the works right in the works, but it's not usdc. It's not usdc. It's not usdt right They don't control it But they do control the intro they trade trading between sometimes they're uh in um, I don't know germany austria uh and uh Jp in uh in uh in new york right Yeah, absolutely and they have a master fed account too, right? Yeah, you know the the stablecoin companies They're not gonna get that kind of access at least not yet Yeah whenever And whenever you wire transfer um Dollars you as dollars Whether it's from South Korean bank account to a South Korean bank account within the same bank It has to be routed Through one of two banks either goldman or jp It's always routed like that and that's their business Yeah, basically yeah, so So, I mean there they they have Kind of obmanopely Yeah, they're considered a g-sub right great and significant international bank like all the g-subs They've got their tentacles like you know dub deep into Yeah, I mean they don't have like complete monopoly, but they like SpaceX has complete monopoly over over Over satellite internet complete monopoly 100% right every every one else is Like irrelevant at this point they're irrelevant maybe in five years We're gonna have you know amazon and european System and whatnot, but like right now like you said g-subs You know, it's spread everybody has their piece of a cake right now With stables not It cannot be done like that. It's gonna be it's gonna be two two Two companies and then probably we're gonna have The same Companies or their subsidiaries of circle for example or tether and for I know Argentine piece of right on Nigerian Naira right? Oh, yeah, is this a stipend twice? Oh Sorry Peter. What was that? Oh, I said is this a stable coin space And no, it's a it's a big coin space, but he was just trying to make a point that like stable coins are supposed to be the the thing that leads everyone to Bitcoin and I don't know I don't necessarily I mean yeah, they can be onboarded a little bit easier but I I feel like they're just gonna get preferential tax treatment to stable coins and the um, you know into these companies and they're just gonna make it Less efficient to use Bitcoin over time Um, yeah, I like like right Yeah, I just don't I I mean I try to be hopeful, but I'm also trying to uh Kind of look at this from an adversarial lens Guys, I wanted to talk about Bitcoin for a second before I've got to go to work if that's okay Um, so if we agree that the value proposition of Bitcoin is that you can send Value across countries in minutes for about a dollar and What this bit 110 Aftermath is as basic as the node runners that they don't matter So the people that verify your transactions Um without Being paid to do so I've just been told that they don't matter by the money by the by the super So is Bitcoin not just captured now um, I mean as a pro bit one tenor and a guy has been running knots for a while I feel like um What made the points and fail is not just That the nodes were being run like most of the people who've not had been running the nodes Maybe weren't properly connecting to other peers or um, they weren't actually engaging in economic activity like Uh, I hate the the economic weight argument, right? Like that. Oh these nodes have to have heavy like whales Running them. I don't think that's necessarily true. I think it's just people weren't using their nodes Um to Send you know, they're Bitcoin. They weren't They're they're verifying transactions of course just by running it, but I don't think that was enough Um, but maybe I'm wrong. I don't know Okay, well, so what's to stop any Really bad changes in the future? Do you think this is going to be like what about if um Luke Dasha Creates this this new algorithm and all those node runners that know how to defend Bitcoin jump over Um, and they continue on who's going to defend um, the current algorithm Uh, from like you know Moving the 21 million supply chain, you know supply and things like that who's going to defend These positions if they will leave Well, I think a hard side for as much harder like right like and yeah, there are only a few pools. So it is centralized Um, but I don't think it would be in their best interest to increase this supply cap. It just want to make sense Um, they're doing things like thinking about UTXO Like taxation and uh, I mean, there's a few devs who kind of brought that up from core Which I didn't like obviously it's a terrible idea because they don't Like they don't like I feel like some the core people don't actually think that Bitcoin will replace the Swift banking system, but They they think that it's just always going to be alongside fiat And that it needs other use cases. So miners can get paid Um, from those use cases So that way the you know, the security budget remains intact like I don't understand that mindset, but for some reason they have that mindset And the one cool thing. I think The forking off thing like you know the new algorithm Maybe that's going to be more quantum resistant So maybe that attracts new plebs Um, and it builds like a stronger chain That's more resilient to possible quantum attacks in the future And maybe people will move migrate over but I don't know like I have no idea what's going to happen Um, I might have to get a Cm miner to just uh Try to hash for those guys, but what do you think? Well, well, so I've got four asset miners, right? Top, you know, one of the most expensive ones you can buy So look, I've only got about one pet a hash Right, so I understand a little bit about mining and look at the hash rate index Um with this new fork is basically going to tackle the miners And I'm I don't know if I'm going to gonna stay mining because it is it's a mugs game Um, I don't know if I'm going to sell it. I'm not sure, but I'm probably going to buy one of the miners on the new algorithm Because for the simple fact is Um Where I am at the moment Like it feels like Bitcoin is already captured, you know, it it feels like It it's already taxed Um Every transaction has a capital gains tax where I where I live if you want to if you can send Bitcoin Um, and it's already censored Um So like you know, it's 10 years time Um, this is just going to get worse and worse if there's no one to defend the Bitcoin protocol Right, and this is why there's no economic incentive for notes. This is why there's economic incentive for miners To to mine But now it feels like Basically they can run car Blanc And there's going to be a lot of changes and I don't think there's going to be enough Like there is not enough node runners anyway Um, I don't think there's going to be enough non-geable node runners to defend But the next wall the next Fork soft for Um, what do you think? I don't know man like uh if it does get harder to to run a node of course Well, we fixed a lot of stuff and the core updates and makes it a lot easier to run a node and verify all the transactions, especially when you're first starting out. But you know, it's... And the log is so hard, we're running the node. What's up? What's so hard we're running the node? Your initial sync and like it just goes to a complete crawl, whatever it gets to... Depending on the node and your service, the only couple days, even if it was a week, why would that be an issue? It's done after the week. Well, you want to optimize Bitcoin to be as easy as possible to run a node. You want it to make it where... You don't think cold storage is much harder than running a node. The node you just start up and you just let it sit there for... Whenever you're trying, for example, I don't know what you do for a living, but imagine a Fortune 500 company and someone approaches them and says, Hey, you should add my software to your tech stack and I want to sell it for this much or whatever. And they're like, okay, how long is the implementation? Five years. It doesn't matter how good it is. You're going to take five months for a node to download? No, but it's going to get much worse. What if you get a really expensive to run a node? If you just blow out this... I don't know too much about this, but you blow out the opposite limit and the blocks keep moving and proving. In 10 years' time, it costs 10 grand to run that node. No one's going to run one. So it's not going to be like that. It's going to get cheaper as it has been. But even if an issue comes up, you don't think that it would be a consensus to fix the problem. Well, that's why... Why try to fix a potential problem that we don't even know is going to be a problem in 10 years? Well, we know it's a problem now. It's a problem now. What? Get in a node? Sync? Yeah, it is. It's excessively... It takes roughly three days. Maybe four days if you're lucky. For some people. But if it took a week, what are they going to lose by having the node sit there? They're not doing nothing with the node anyway. It's not like they actively use it in a node. It didn't use to take that long as the point. I get that. But it's not like it's a car. It's not like it's a car and you're like, OK, I got my car sitting outside. I can't use it for a whole week. So it's kind of pointless. The node is just sitting there, syncing. Even if it was a week, or it's done after a week, it doesn't have to sync 10 more weeks. After a week it's done. Well, the problem with that is... It's only America that would be able to do it eventually. Like what you want is nodes running in Africa with a verified transaction. And the more expensive it becomes to run a node in the long run, where it takes. Now it's going to do it. There's no economic incentive to run a node. I think this node talk is kind of the same thing with this bit 1.10 stuff, where it's kind of pointless trying to fix something that ain't a problem. That was a whole point. Well, the idea was right and the messaging was not effective. You want to keep the data carrier size to a minimum. It's a transaction. Yeah, I mean, I don't understand how people are like, oh no, that doesn't make sense. Like, what? More is law. You know, you're just going to be able to buy additional memory. And it's going to be fine, bro. Trust me, bro. Like 10 years from now. There's so much false information being spread here. It's unreal. Unreal. All right. Well, let's go. You guys, you guys, it like, I mean, okay, the last node that I synced from scratch took me 13 hours. There you go. See? I have 13 hours. By the way, hold on. Hold on. I haven't seen mine in like a year or two. By the way, the next release, the next release of core 32, they've got the initial download three times faster. This is the kind of stuff for us working on. Hold on. Hold on. There's $30 full sync from blog zero. Absolutely. Nice. Okay. So that's on SSD drives and like, and they're worried about it. They're worried about it taking 10 years, T.C. Look, the other thing that inspired me to jump up and join here is somebody said there's not enough node runners. When there's absolutely overkill number of nodes being run right now, the whole network would operate perfectly if 90% of the nodes switched off right now. It would still flawlessly work. And as time goes on, there will be more node runners over time. And it's just one of these. It's a it's a fundamental misunderstanding about like what is the actual landscape that Bitcoin operates on? Anyone can run a node on any computer. And the initial download, it could be a pain in the butt. I like what Bitcoin bull said. You only got to do that once. Okay. 10 years from now, you're going to have a you're going to have a dozen different choices of what how to run a node on your phone. 10 years from now. And you cover an approved node. You don't even have to have a full node. Of course. It's just it's just a pile of red herrings. It's a dump truck full of red herrings that you guys are constantly pointing to constantly. And I would ask like how many on chain transactions you do I've done about a thousand in the last five years. And I'll tell you they go through faster now than I remember them going through three or four years ago. It's insane. They always take this thing. This thing works phenomenally. And so all of this like worry trolling concern trolling about oh no nodes are going to cost too much or oh no this and it's just a sign, especially on the heels of the disaster of a soft fork that we just saw three days ago. Like come on. Do you have your eyes closed? Do you have your head in the sand? Are they getting shape? It's a run. Sure. You can have a fully synced node for what TC maybe 50 bucks. If you want to find a computer someone would give you for free. The only expensive part of the thing is memory hard drives have also gone up a little bit. But honestly like you guys are missing even what is the point of running a node. You're not a philanthropist running a node. You're not running a node to decentralize Bitcoin. You're not running a node for everybody else's transactions or whatever other memes you might have heard. There is one reason and one reason alone to run a node. It's to verify your own transactions verify your wallet balances and have unfettered access to the network for yourself. So you're not asking someone else permission to broadcast your transaction. These are self interested incentives like everything else in Bitcoin. And if you get all wrapped up in this idea that somehow you got to do something or we need to change something for these other people in the future, you're wrong. There's plenty of people today who just don't understand it because it doesn't get said in the right way. You should run a node if you self custody because of the reasons I just listed off. So you're not asking someone else for permission so that you're not like asking someone else, hey, is my balance still there? Did I did my cold card get rugged? Imagine asking someone else and not just looking at your own copy of the chain. That's what a node is. Okay. This whole thing is just wildly warped out of perspective. And you have to understand what those primary incentives are. Bitcoin makes a ton of sense when you realize miners mine because they're driven to get Bitcoin out of discount. Node runners run nodes because they give a damn about their privacy and their own sovereignty. And they don't want to ask permission to check the chain or to broadcast. Okay. These are the incentives. So don't get it twisted and you'll feel a lot better and you'll have a whole lot less more stress and anxiety about other people in the world 10 years in the future. Right. No one disagreed with what you just said. No one disagreed with that. But the very, very conservative proposal was just overturned by a centralized mining force. No. No proposal was overturned. There was a proposal that was absolutely ignored. Nothing was overturned. See, look, again, you've got to see how people twist words around because if you listen to the BIP 110 camp, they'll tell you that everyone else forked off of their network. It's exactly inverted. They forked off. And by the way, this was entirely predictable and most people could see it coming from a year out. And that somehow all the people in the BIP 110 camp were completely brainwashed and convinced that this wasn't going to just instantly be a hard fork. And anyone who actually understands how Bitcoin works should have known Fred Kruger. You got some studying to do so that you understand better how Bitcoin works and you wouldn't have gotten sucked into the BIP 110 nonsense. Burn. I like PC. I thought the, the intent was good. I thought that other mining force would join the fray. And I didn't see any damage and actually no damage was done actually. The only thing that was lost in this whole thing was among work of our time, which is like two years. Like the whole thing is kind of a waste of time. You go in last month. It was maybe one month. Okay. People, people had the best intentions on both sides. That's my opinion. I just didn't like the way that they communicated with each other because I thought it was beneath Bitcoin. That's all. Okay. And there's no reason to continue arguing and fighting. And it doesn't help anyone. Yeah. I'm not interested in arguing or fighting. I just think that as we stand here now on the other side of this event that was so anticipated. I think there's such informative and useful takeaways for anyone who was on either side. The people that were against BIP 110 feel vindicated because exactly what they said was going to happen is exactly what happened. And the people that were for BIP 110, there's a whole spectrum. Some people are really coming around to seeing they were wrong about some of their assumptions. Other people are digging their heels in. But either way, every single time Bitcoin has one of these situations in its history, it's an incredible learning opportunity. And I think it's on us on every single one who considers himself a Bitcoiner to do that learning and find those takeaways. You know, the whole thing with BIP 110 is easy to say yes. This was good intentions. But good intentions aren't good enough. Okay. When you're good, when you're good intentions run into reality as a brick wall. That's where you should reassess where your good intentions fit into the puzzle. In this case, the good intentions ran into a brick wall of how consensus works in Bitcoin. And also just the reality about what was really a problem. You know, because three years ago, we saw 2000 sats per V by a lot of people, including myself, were concerned. But as time goes on, Bitcoin shows you how it works. It shows you how the whole system adjusts. And it's phenomenal. It's a site to be. It's actually a logical flaw that, you know, a lot of us didn't kind of catch. And I mean, you might have gotten it, but nobody, nobody really clearly articulated it. And, you know, mechanic was out there saying, listen, people are going to vote for BIP 110 because there's no cost to not vote. Now, that wasn't true because if you vote for a chain built on, if you don't, if you don't vote to build a chain on the current block. So the first block mine was an ample block, right? And then then people were saying, okay, great. So I'm going to build off that. So then the second block was this ocean block. But they did, they rejected the ample block, right? So actually there was a very an economic reality. You had to choose your side. And if you decided to not build on that ample block, you didn't get the block for open. So those two blocks on the BIP 110 that that rough next mind did not get any block reward. So it, you know, this argument that mechanic and Cratter and others put forth. And I kind of repeated it, but other people, other people said it. And I was like, okay, this is kind of makes sense. The problem with that argument is it ignored the fact that you have to build on a specific chain. So if you're ignoring the longest chain and you're building on this other chain. Well, Fred, that's why the hard fork was absolutely predictable. If you looked at the signaling, Fred, if you looked at the signaling leading up to the day of this soft fork, hard fork, whatever you want to call it, it was clear. And everyone who predicted that that's about where the signaling would be knew exactly what was going to happen. You just have to understand how the hash rates distributed and you have to understand as soon as, as soon as ampoule and foundry and these other mining pools, mine blocks without signaling, it is game over. And so then you just need to understand simple probabilities when you understand the percentages of where the hash rate was. Pretty bad, even the week before because I mean the big 110 crew was saying, yeah, it's going to all change the week before. And then of course, nothing changed. And then they were like, well, this is a two week process, not a day process. Well, that's clearly, you know, they could have activated over a year ago if they had the people behind them, even before signaling. Anyways, I think that, I mean, a lot of people were kind of soft, that it went down the way it went down. I have a question for DC, but Cliff had his hand up for ages now. Cliff, go. I appreciate that, I appreciate that, bro. Shout out to you, Fred. I see we have a childish little, little little little individual in the building that could probably do well to check their ego and hubris. Shout out to TC. I largely agree with most of what's been said. And I agree that this really is an opportunity to move forward, to educate the Bitcoin community, to empower the Bitcoin community. And as a result, get all the things that we want to see. We want to see adoption. We want to see advancement of the technology. You know, as far as bootstrapping a node, there are so many ways to scan that cat to make bootstrapping a node, you know, sub one hour. Shout out to mytheral signatures. You know, for instance, you can have a set of the of the of the of the miners and the nodes that after a proven period of flawless participation in the network, you can assign a waiting to their signature and people can opt in to say, hey, these are trusted validators. And you can, you can basically have a bootstrap live condition and then fill in the history as required. Check out mytheral signatures. I think after Bitcoin 10 man, we're in a really good spot to move on a better conversations like privacy incorporated at the L one. I think M web is inevitable for folks that don't know what M web is go go go look into mumble and bull extension blocks that offers not only privacy, but scalability and quantum resistant solutions. So I'll land the plan there. Shout out to you, Fred, for for not only just the time in the mic, but having the persistent conversation, you know, and and humility. These toxic maximalists, if you really look at it, they're the ones that led the Bitcoin 10 charge. They're also the ones that that funnel people into the cold card situation. And I would say TC, there are more than one, there's more than one reason to run a node. It isn't only because not everyone is going to run a full node, be a lightning network operator so they can transcend seven transactions per second. I just think that as as a favored fluid mechanics professor once told me, certainly there is uncertainty when we were discussing the Navier Stokes equations and modeling of turbulent flow. So certainly there's uncertainty. I think if we dial down the toxicity and the hubris and the ego, because ultimately and and I think you also highlighted something really well, TC, we have to meet the market where it is and understand the realities of the engineering like seven transactions per second and true game theoretical adoption. For my money, Bitcoin alone isn't the solution. Now that having been said, I think Bitcoin maximalism itself is not a is not a wrong approach. These guys are shit corner. I think leave is a shaggy. Yeah, yeah. Can I get a taxi? Yes, please. I'm trying to understand both sides of the argument here and all I'm hearing is the bit 110 guys are crazy in this stupid but Luke felt the need to hard fork like the main chain and I'm trying to understand why can anyone engage with me on this? I think, okay, so I think that he basically cloned the entire chain because there are hotlers already there and he will gain kind of free marketing for whatever the new coin is. Some say he might have other incentives. Okay, but I have a question for you TC from from before cliff started talking so let's say that someone a retail who was never exposed to Bitcoin and during this let's say a month or two ago when big one 10 and changes to Bitcoin or coming or are they or you know titles like that. He saw a couple of articles on some mainstream media and he decided to join a couple of spaces. He heard probably you know fights and arguments. What do you think happened with that retail person? Did he buy? Did he think, hey, all these guys are crazy? What do you think happened? Why don't you get another hotler or not? Well, I have to put your question right back at you and ask you the purpose of asking the question because it sounds to me like it's coming from an assumption like we all have to change how we communicate or else Bitcoin's going to fail. Why not? Why not? No, why not? Because because there's nothing you or I or anyone else in this room can do to accelerate Bitcoin's adoption. It's going to happen as it happens. It is the solution to a problem and the people that encounter that problem and encounter this solution. A fair number of those should be compelled to look further and that is all stuff that happens outside of my actions, your actions or anyone else's actions. Are we Bitcoin? Are we Bitcoin? I don't know what you're asking. We are a part of Bitcoin. All of us. That's a reach and that's a philosophical question. I'm not sure where the concrete question or answer lies. Basically it lies that we represented with our actions. If you use language like that, it's very easy to spin up misleading narratives. That's the problem here. This is the whole problem with Bitcoin 110 in the first place is that narratives that lie inside people's hearts and emotions and feelings and thoughts is incompatible with the hard coded real reality of the actual protocol and network itself. Because there are certain realities, there's the brick wall I was referring to earlier. There are certain realities that you're just not going to change without breaking something significant. And I think that's where when people say, well, there were good intentions behind Bitcoin 110. That's wonderful and good intentions are great, but they should basically stop at the point they meet a real technology and protocol that actually excludes the possibility of making those good intentions. And those good intentions changes without breaking something and in this case without hard forking off and making a shit going. Well, was it just going to do under different algorithm it's still Bitcoin as a question. It's not still Bitcoin. There's only one Bitcoin. Well, is it there one Bitcoin on the few out of it? No. If I understand your question, the answer is no. Okay, no, I'm just asking the question because I was looking at Luke's poster day and he had like eight algorithms, he was gonna make a new chain under. You know what it's called making a new chain? It's called spinning off an alt coin or colloquially a shit coin. That's what that is called. So he will call it something like Luke coin or... It doesn't matter, it doesn't matter what it's called. It's not Bitcoin anymore. Is there a name for this name? Oh, look, let me, can I say something because a BitOne 10 advocate for like a year straight now. Like I realized like pretty much immediately that it failed. And today, because Luke blocked me, because I commented and said put us back on the longer chain, you've got wide adoption of nods. Like just continue to try to like fight the fight of spam or whatever the hell, like talk with the court, try to do something, right? He blocked me. So I switched the court a day, adjusted the offer, turned back down to 83 bytes. And I'm going on about my day. Why can't everybody else... Why is everybody... I guarantee nobody's selling their Bitcoin that's got the value behind it and buy and fucking the BitOne 10 coin. You know? Like these... I think a lot of these people have like lost their Marvel in other words, say the least. Oh, but they've lost the plot. I mean, it's kind of like Nick said, they're basically gone. Well, I think it's like this is why I've been hearing, okay? Is that BitOne said failed and therefore arbitrary data spam doesn't matter. No, it's not that it doesn't matter. You know, what a lot of people that I talk to have been saying for years remains true and will remain true going into the future. There is no way to prevent people putting arbitrary data into Bitcoin. Do you know what arbitrary data means? It's like... Like literally anything that somebody finds of interest or value, I've actually witnessed people that was a hilarious exchange between mononaut and Rendale about three years ago where they were grinding out addresses and were so stoked when they got the characters, C-O-F-F-E-E, inside of a Bitcoin address. And that gets perceived as something special, hence something of value. You're talking about human subjectivity. And when you talk about the actual surface area of a Bitcoin transaction, there are so many different places you could put data. And as we've seen, especially as this BIP 110 thing went on in the last several months, there were people incentivized because of these false narratives to actually figure out how to stick in arbitrary data even in spite of these rules that BIP 110 was trying to add or change. The whole point is, you're never going to have this stuff go away. And every single thing that you would want to change is going to introduce some problem or break something else. So it really comes down to do you believe this fantasy that you can actually stop this data and not break Bitcoin, or you're so upset about arbitrary data that you have to stop it even if you break Bitcoin. No. Okay, this is not the argument, is it? That's not the argument. Yeah, sorry, man. So, that's all right. So, hold on. It was designed to close some of the easiest high bandwidth data carried paths rather than just pretending every single little encoding could be eliminated. Right? It's just like, if the people who are like, oh, we shouldn't have a wall at the border, or we shouldn't have a fence around our backyard or whatever, it's not going to stop everybody. We don't need to call the all police in on this. It's not about stopping all. It's about mitigating some of the damage that it potentially causes. Right? That's not like, what's the damage that it causes? It makes it more expensive and takes longer to run a node. Okay, but we've already been through how that's a red herring argument. How is that a red herring argument? It's been proven over the last year. Do we need to repeat this? Oh, that chord, like, updated their newest. No, I mean, that's just a bright spot coming going forward. But, I mean, if you run a node or even several nodes, if you've gone through the process of setting them up, it's trivial. And worst case scenario, you wait a few days. And that's been the way it's been since long before any of these other changes in the last few years. So, it's just one. If that's only at the demand for all these little 1% use cases doesn't grow. No, again, you're talking hypotheticals and you're making assumptions. And then you're jumping to conclusions from those assumptions. And this is why it's not a conversation that you can get across the board consensus for. It's opinion based. It's subjective. That's your opinion, man. So, when it does become much more difficult for an individual run, a node runner, to start running their own archival node, right? If that does happen, do you think we're going to be able to change it? Do you think a soft fork will be able to be a minute? Again, it's just an irrelevant question. I would ask you, where's the person today that wants to run a node and can't find that person? I want to hear from them, not you. Your privilege, you live in the West, you have a ton of optionality. Okay. And now you're now you're concern trolling about the global south or a bunch of other people in the distant future and assuming that there's going to be some problem. It's really way, way out there, away from where grounded, thoughtful conversation happens. Well, hang on, man. Your argumentation can be better here. You're not engaged in the first instance here. You'll just say in the other side's argument, ridiculous. Peter, the funny thing about technology is it speaks for itself. Anyone in the world can download Bitcoin and run it and never talk to another Bitcoiner. And they don't need to hear from you or me or anyone else explaining to them what it is. The technology tells you what it is. It speaks for itself. It just does what it does. So again, what first principles are being missed here? I feel like the first principle about the fact of what I just said about technology is being ignored because people have feelings that got hurt. Well, I mean, I can't hear from him. Money is an argument, right? So like, can someone in a poor country in Africa, can they run a note? Yes. The way things are going, okay? And in 10 years' time, if it becomes a more expensive and longer, and they need a lot of bandwidth, they need a lot of internet, a lot of power, can they still run a note? Yes. Will it be more expensive in to run a note? So look, do you not see how problematic that question is? You're like, it's going to be more expensive. Like, what's the dividing line? It's a totally individual dynamic. Every individual has different economic circumstances. Every individual has different access to computers and networks. What are you talking about? Well, so that's Luke and Bitcoin Mechanics' argument, isn't it? That you keep the data caricized low. So it's cheaper and everyone can transact cheaply. You know, there's a block size limit, right? You know, there's a block size limit. So if we had enough transactions, let's just even call them monetary transactions just to use the parlance, okay? If they were four megabytes of monetary transactions, a bunch of people were using Taproot and they were writing incredible scripts to lay out their inheritance plans and all kinds of other amazing financial functions. And we had four megabyte blocks full of monetary transactions. Would you be saying the same thing? Because to me, the entire like pointing at the size of transactions and crying about it is aesonine when you're talking about a fixed limited block size that's been enforced since the beginning of Bitcoin. Like, that's that is what keeps this not being a problem. And if the blocks get full, the fees, the fees, no, it's not the worst case. That's called hyperbiccoinization. That's called Bitcoin's being used by everyone around the planet. Isn't that what you and a bunch of other people who are four bit one tend have wanted for a long time and you're so concerned about adoption and use? Oh, but if we're actually being used that much, it's a problem. Come on, you've got to see the dissonance in these different perspectives. The truth is it's going to get adoption as it gets adoption. It'll happen in the time frame. It happens. Most people here would like to see all this happen in the next five years and the truth is it may take 50 years and you may be dead and your kids or grandkids are going to experience the renaissance. But either way for us to look at it and get tweaked out because some transactions are bigger than others. Some transactions have graffiti on them. Some transactions have things that you consider utterly worthless and somebody else thinks is valuable. Like it just doesn't matter. It's just forgetting the spirit of the whole thing. It's permissionless. It's you as a sovereign individual, you run Bitcoin, you create a wallet, you get some sats on those addresses and now you can do with them whatever you want. Nobody can say anything or stop you. Where's the main? Listen, you don't see a problem here, but if you're running a node, you have no say now what goes on your node. You just have to accept this shit. You have opted into it. Again, it's a fun, you want to talk about first principles. When you're on a node, you are opting in to have the entire archive of the entire chain, meaning every single transaction and all its content. You opted into that. Yeah, so now I have to accept the dick pics. You know, no, you don't have to nothing. You can run Bitcoin or not, but when you do, you're opting in to certain things. This whole idea that, well, I'm going to run Bitcoin, but I don't want yours crap on my node. It's just absolute retarded bullshit. It's such a bad perspective. Why is that bad perspective? Because you are opting in to participate. You are a voluntary participant in the system. Okay. You're okay. You have to, you know, you have to, you want to participate, but you're saying I have no choice to participate in holding pictures. No, you know how many people don't run a node? I got friends who post hashtag not good, and they're defiant about not running nodes. If you decide you want to run a node, you are making the same decision to opt into everything involved with that node. You get some choices. If you don't want to, if you don't want to fill up a hard drive, you can run a pruned node, and you have other choices about policy. If you don't want to relay certain transactions, but at the end of the day, what is the purpose of the node? It's to be for you. So you're, you're fighting yourself. You're saying I want this because I want to be able to be sovereign with my transactions, and I want to verify my balances. Oh, but I don't want to do the things that I'm opting in to do because I don't like what those other people did with their Bitcoin. It's it's