BitcoinIsFuture -- 60d nostr:npub1lh273a4wpkup00stw8dzqjvvrqrfdrv2v3v4t8pynuezlfe5vjnsnaa9nk can you help here clarify the things with soft fork narrowing the rules and getting back to previous ones after expiration? replynostr:npub1lh273a4wpkup00stw8dzqjvvrqrfdrv2v3v4t8pynuezlfe5vjnsnaa9nk can you help here clarify the things with soft fork narrowing the rules and getting back to previous ones after expiration?
thread · root b326cdfa…85b9 · depth 10 · · selected 278c9b8d…fc82
thread
root b326cdfa…85b9 · depth 10 · · selected 278c9b8d…fc82
You are just being voluntary obtuse in order to win an argument. Anyone can pretend not to understand a point.Also, you talk like you are charge, but it's not like anyone is going to adjust anything at that point, right?It's just one small group trying to impose their views to everyone else no matter the disagreements, and goingto fail achieving anything at all for that very reason. 🤔
I asked you to be specific and you showed your ass. You just admitted that you want Bitcoin to be a "worldcomputer" and keep the inscriptions hack. Don't get mad at me because you're embarrassed that you bustedyourself. Your agenda is on the table and now it's obvious that your original position was disingenuous.Bitcoin is money. Keep your shitcoining out of Bitcoin.
BitVM is Citrea's shit and has nothing monetary about it, pure data storage. The guy is a shitcoiner with shitarguments.BIP 110 is temporary because that way we can analyze its effectiveness and if it can be improved it will beimproved and then made permanent.Its on the mailing list discussion in the first mail of Dathon Ohmhttps://gnusha.org/pi/bitcoindev/CALiT-ZrT+R7ApsQJOtKM5h5xTThGL-WMyCRDwt29sXmt4AA+Rg@mail.gmail.com/T/#t
Thanks. I probably won't have time to dig into the mailing list though. And I still don't get the justificationfor it being temporary. I would think that if we need a subsequent change, do a subsequent change.Or maybe I do get it...Is it because by letting it expire we could make adjustments as a subsequent soft fork, rather than risking ahard fork, since the starting position would be current constraints and not 110 constraints?
I think its the more humble approach. It buys us time, we can analyze its effectiveness and improve it ifneeded. Bitcoin, although much simpler than the Eth shitcoin, has still complex structures and constructs. Alsoafter we have tested it for a year and it works as intended we then confidently can apply it permenantly. Beingtemporary it should be theoretically easier to gain consensus as well.
And if it was permanent and we find something that was too tight, losening it again would be a hard fork. But ifit's temporary, we get a second bite at the apple if we need it. That's not just humble, it's thoughtful andresponsible.
Yup
You just cleared up my remaining question about 110, thanks a lot
To be precise I think, as a soft-fork that narrows the consensus rules, it can narrow them and then expand themup to the previous limits without problems as the old implementations will be compatible and accept narrower orthe same rules. Its hard fork only when expanded and backwards compatibility is broken.
nostr:npub1lh273a4wpkup00stw8dzqjvvrqrfdrv2v3v4t8pynuezlfe5vjnsnaa9nk can you help here clarify the things withsoft fork narrowing the rules and getting back to previous ones after expiration?
I asked you to be specific and you showed your ass. You just admitted that you want Bitcoin to be a "world computer" and keep the inscriptions hack. Don't get mad at me because you're embarrassed that you busted yourself. Your agenda is on the table and now it's obvious that your original position was disingenuous.
Bitcoin is money. Keep your shitcoining out of Bitcoin.
BitcoinIsFuture -- 60d [parent] | reply [1 reply]BitVM is Citrea's shit and has nothing monetary about it, pure data storage. The guy is a shitcoiner with shit arguments. BIP 110 is temporary because that way we can analyze its effectiveness and if it can be improved it will be improved and then made permanent. Its on the mailing list discussion in the first mail of Dathon Ohm https://gnusha.org/pi/bitcoindev/CALiT-ZrT+R7ApsQJOtKM5h5xTThGL-WMyCRDwt29sXmt4AA+Rg@mail.gmail.com/T/#t
c4368c51…0da6 -- 60d [parent] | reply [1 reply]Thanks. I probably won't have time to dig into the mailing list though. And I still don't get the justification for it being temporary. I would think that if we need a subsequent change, do a subsequent change. Or maybe I do get it... Is it because by letting it expire we could make adjustments as a subsequent soft fork, rather than risking a hard fork, since the starting position would be current constraints and not 110 constraints?
BitcoinIsFuture -- 60d [parent] | reply [1 reply]I think its the more humble approach. It buys us time, we can analyze its effectiveness and improve it if needed. Bitcoin, although much simpler than the Eth shitcoin, has still complex structures and constructs. Also after we have tested it for a year and it works as intended we then confidently can apply it permenantly. Being temporary it should be theoretically easier to gain consensus as well.
c4368c51…0da6 -- 60d [parent] | reply [1 reply]And if it was permanent and we find something that was too tight, losening it again would be a hard fork. But if it's temporary, we get a second bite at the apple if we need it. That's not just humble, it's thoughtful and responsible.
BitcoinIsFuture -- 60d [parent] | reply [1 reply]Yup
c4368c51…0da6 -- 60d [parent] | reply [1 reply]You just cleared up my remaining question about 110, thanks a lot
BitcoinIsFuture -- 60d [parent] | reply [1 reply]To be precise I think, as a soft-fork that narrows the consensus rules, it can narrow them and then expand them up to the previous limits without problems as the old implementations will be compatible and accept narrower or the same rules. Its hard fork only when expanded and backwards compatibility is broken.