Here is how I would do a stealth 51% attack on bitcoin.

[PepeLapiu]

Yes, it is a 51% attack, the textbook definition of it.

No, an 51% attack means that a 50+% majority is able to reorg the chain.

You are overthinking it. A pool with 51% of the hash can do a 51% attack. Two pools teaming up with 51% of the hash can still do a 51% attack.

Thou shall mine all transactions which are consensus compliant, otherwise you give up a (small) part of your hashrate.

That can be yourmottoI if you are a spam miner. But the network needs to guide and regulate the pools and miners to keep the network clean. Core obviously is not up to the task, so the nodes will rectify the situation.

If filters don't work, consensus will.

If you reach consensus outside of your tiny Lukecoin bubble. And that's a quite big "if".

Get your popcorn. Early September will be fun to watch.

Only that in that case, I think even we both agree that the "good ones" are the anti-filters guys.

You are anti-filter? You want to take away more filters, even those running since 2010?

Anti-filter, or pro-spam, or coretard.
Poteyto, potato.

I would have perhaps (!) supported a stricter consensus-based ruleset if it was carefully crafted, to not put any useful mechanisms (like LN, inheritance contracts etc.) in danger, and above all: only considered an emergency measure if spam really was ramping up again. But "BIP-110" is kindergarden level programming, sorry.

Several things wrong with that statement.

- Spam has been getting worst and worst over the last 4 years. You have to have your fucking head in the sand not to know this.

- BIP110 doesn't hinder LN. Stop making shit up.

- It's likely nobody is using complicated inheritance contracts with op_if in Taproot, which woul d actually release too much data on chain, and be poor for privacy. Sorry, you don't get to play with your fucking complicated toys until we fix them to work properly.

- You claim you are anti-spam but you walk like a pro-spam coretard, and you quack like a pro-spam coretard. Youfinsd some stupid reason to reject every single anti-spam idea.

Just look at my idea to raise the dust limit. You reject it because you think it won't make it possible to send $2 of coin to someone else. And even after I expksinec that you could send $2 of coin with a simple multisig, you still reject it.

Spam dust makes up 85% of Taproot UTXOs. Convoluted complicated inheritance schemes involving op_if in Taproot would have to be in that remaining small minority of 15%.
Those users are pretty advanced users. They would not only have to use an outdated wallet, or one that refuses to update to the new rules, but they would also have to lose their private keys, or deliberately delete them, and also be completely unaware of the controversy over op_if in Taproot.

I'm pretty sure those users don't exist. Especially when you consider the use of op_if in Taproot is badpractice as you'd deliberately broadcast un-needed data on chain.

[ertil]

Each filter in Knots are easily configurable.

Including consensus filters? How do you expect that to work?

Knots by themselves are completely unable to block any specific kind of script.

Then, what BIP-110 is really about, if not blocking specific kinds of scripts? How users can be sure, that what they create today, won't be blocked tomorrow, if filters are configurable, and can be dynamically extended?

But let's entertain your retarded claim of Knots deciding to block all non-AML compliant scripts tomorrow. Who's going to go along with that retarded idea?

All enemies of Bitcoin, who will know, that there is a working way to block spam, which can be just expanded to block more things, in exactly the same way. Because if you can block one transaction, then you can block another one, in exactly the same way. Which means, that if BIP-110 will succeed, then similar BIPs may be created, which will just expand the filters to cover more things.

And once you start blocking spammy transactions, then there will be no way back. There will be always someone, who will want to reject your transaction. And BIP-110 will just give these people tools to do that.

BIP110 doesn't hinder LN.

It blocks OP_IF, which is used in LN to some extent.

Sorry, you don't get to play with your fucking complicated toys until we fix them to work properly.

Then, at least provide RPC commands like "checkisspamtransaction", which would return true or false for any given transaction. Because users should explicitly know, what is allowed, and what is not, instead of guessing it. If that command would ever return "not a spam", then users should have enough confidence to use it, otherwise you will have a coin, where nobody can be sure about that, which will push people outside to other coins.

[CoreRulezKnotsAreFulez]

edit: @CoreRulezKnotsAreFulez anyone from the DC they had here in NY move up there with you? I know there was some talk about people moving but since I was the external hired help they never told me if anyone did.

As far as I know one guy came from Buffalo and one other guy from someplace on Long Island. All others are local to here. I do not work for them and our rackspace is not even on the same floor but we do talk at times in the common spaces of the building.

Get your popcorn. Early September will be fun to watch.

As many have pointed out the date is the beginning of August when the chain will split for anyone running knots. It's in the code. Not knowing that simple fact shows you don't really know what you are talking about.
There will be a split.
If not by anyone else we are not going to follow the knots chain an neither is anyone else in the building. The broker that buys most of the coins that are mined here has made it clear that they are antiknots. So if anyone wants to get paid for the BTC that the multiples of EH/s that are mined here they are not going to follow knots.

Its actually how I even found out about it. No miner here even heard about knots before the broker sent emails to people warning them about it.

[PepeLapiu]

Get your popcorn. Early September will be fun to watch.

As many have pointed out the date is the beginning of August when the chain will split for anyone running knots. It's in the code. Not knowing that simple fact shows you don't really know what you are talking about.

BIP-110 is expected to activate on September 1, 2026, following a mandatory signaling period that begins in early August 2026. (from DDG search assist)

There will be a split.
If not by anyone else we are not going to follow the knots chain an neither is anyone else in the building. The broker that buys most of the coins that are mined here has made it clear that they are antiknots. So if anyone wants to get paid for the BTC that the multiples of EH/s that are mined here they are not going to follow knots.

Its actually how I even found out about it. No miner here even heard about knots before the broker sent emails to people warning them about it.

That's not how bitcoin works. Big pools and big miners don't control bitcoin rules. And brokers certainly don't control bitcoin rules.

Think about it, the tried to activate Segwit with a miner activation. That didn't go anywhere. Than they switched to a user activation with BIP148. Miners have no incentive to suddenly dish out a 50% discount to anyone. We didn't care, les s than 5% of the nodes were forking to Segwit. Miners went along. Segwit is athingm Thanx to nodes, not miners. You are welcomed.

[DaveF]

As far as I know one guy came from Buffalo and one other guy from someplace on Long Island. All others are local to here. I do not work for them and our rackspace is not even on the same floor but we do talk at times in the common spaces of the building.

Bummer, but not totally unexpected. Guessing you are in IT / networking. Do you have the same issue I do that you keep meaning to check in on old techs you had dealings with and never get to it?

Get your popcorn. Early September will be fun to watch.

As many have pointed out the date is the beginning of August when the chain will split for anyone running knots. It's in the code. Not knowing that simple fact shows you don't really know what you are talking about.

BIP-110 is expected to activate on September 1, 2026, following a mandatory signaling period that begins in early August 2026. (from DDG search assist)

There will be a split.
If not by anyone else we are not going to follow the knots chain an neither is anyone else in the building. The broker that buys most of the coins that are mined here has made it clear that they are antiknots. So if anyone wants to get paid for the BTC that the multiples of EH/s that are mined here they are not going to follow knots.

Its actually how I even found out about it. No miner here even heard about knots before the broker sent emails to people warning them about it.

That's not how bitcoin works. Big pools and big miners don't control bitcoin rules. And brokers certainly don't control bitcoin rules.

Think about it, the tried to activate Segwit with a miner activation. That didn't go anywhere. Than they switched to a user activation with BIP148. Miners have no incentive to suddenly dish out a 50% discount to anyone. We didn't care, les s than 5% of the nodes were forking to Segwit. Miners went along. Segwit is athingm Thanx to nodes, not miners. You are welcomed.

That is exactly how BTC works. Miners choose what and how to mine. Then unless they have a bunch of VC funding they sell those coins to pay for things like electricity and space to host miners and staff and everything else.
It would probably be a bit more accurate to say that miners follow the will of the people who are buying & selling the coins. Because if they can't sell them then they can't pay the bills and then they shut down. So exchanges and miners have a symbiotic relationship. With people who are buying and selling from those exchanges coming in after that.
Node operators don't even rate since we don't contribute to the network in any meaningful financial way. The few downgraded S9 units I have running as space heaters during the winter matter more then the dozen or so nodes I have running.
Even if every node that did not belong to a miner / exchange / service that provides services for BTC (Bitrefill, Wallet of Satoshi, mempool explorers, SPV wallet severs) and so on went offline tomorrow not much would really change. Most BTC users do not run their own nodes. They use services that have nodes. When crypto.com / Gemini / Coinbase and so on announce they are going to running / supporting lukecoin then it will matter.

And although lukecoin will activate in September knots nodes will start rejecting blocks that are not signaling support for it before that. This has been pointed out to you many times it's in the BIP and it's in the code. Which is actually more dangerous for knots. Because people can signal they are supporting it so their blocks will be accepted by the knots nodes but then they just keep on mining what they want after the fact. So it would be trivial for miners to show support and then rugpull at the end.

https://github.com/bitcoinknots/bitcoin/pull/238/files#diff-e20339c384d6f19b519ea2de7f4ba4fed92a36d66a80f0339b09927c3fa38d6dR125

-Dave

[PepeLapiu]

{...)

Imagine what you will, there is no BIP110 failure in the long run. If, for some absurd reason, BIP110 fails in September, we just get a giant "told you so" foam finger for when illicit materials get on chain. Than we bring back BIP110 v2.0 with massive support.

[ertil]

a mandatory signaling period

Of course, "mandatory", only because Luke said so? Miners will simply ignore BIP-110, and use any version without it. The chain wouldn't split, if Knots wouldn't try to force the activation in the code.

Big pools and big miners don't control bitcoin rules.

Sure, but you will need some miners, to push BIP-110 chain forward. Otherwise, your chain would halt. And then, you will have an option: to wait, when your network with 1% hashrate will produce one block per day, and gradually decrease LukeCoin's difficulty, or to change the code, to lower the difficulty, like BCH did.

And brokers certainly don't control bitcoin rules.

They don't control global rules, but they control their own coins. If you introduce rules, which could freeze their coins, just by calling it "a spam" for any subjective reasons, then they have no incentive to support your new rules. Which means, that they will just sell BIP-110 coins for BTCs (if BIP-110 chain will work at all, and if it will have any miners, pushing it forward).

Think about it, the tried to activate Segwit with a miner activation. That didn't go anywhere.

Sure, but Segwit didn't call old addresses "a spam", and didn't try to invalidate old coins by consensus rules. If someone had a chain of timelocked P2PK transactions, then it was valid before Segwit, and it is still valid now. On the other hand, it became invalid on altcoins like BCH, because of their replay protection.

Miners have no incentive to suddenly dish out a 50% discount to anyone.

And they have even less incentive to support changes, which could be used to freeze their own coins, if future developers will just call it "a spam", for arbitrary reasons.

[PepeLapiu]

What Knots wants is thus AMLcoin?

Well, if they will succeed, then it will be also used in that way. Because if you can block spammy transactions, and it will work, then you can block any transaction, by using the same methods.

Again, when confronted with the idea of Lady Gaga videos on chain, Satoshi said: "That's one of the reasons for transaction fees.  There are other things we can do if necessary."

But you try to claim than blocking spam and Lady Gaga videos is the same thing as censoring non AML compliant UTXOs? Get the fuck out of here.

The nodes WOULD NEVER GO ALONG WITH THAT NONSENSE. But we all know if that ever happens, it will likely come from the big pools,nort from the 90,000 nodes.

But go ahead. Try to do a fork with AML/KYC compliance. See how many nodes will go along with that shit. But fear not, those big spam pools with a legal department will surely sign up for that shit. Only, they know the nodes won't go along with it.

(...)

Aren't you the one who claimed that making fees more expensive for spammers by removing their Segwit discount would make it more attractive for miners to pick up spam transactions?
You have no credibility.

And brokers certainly don't control bitcoin rules.

They don't control global rules, but they control their own coins. If you introduce rules, which could freeze their coins, just by calling it "a spam" for any subjective reasons, then they have no incentive to support your new rules.

BIP110 will not freeze any coin in any existing UTXOs. BIP110 doesn't even look at any specific transaction and flags it as unspensable spam. You are making that shit up.

BIP110 mainly moves into consensus the op_return limit of 83 byes so that coretards can't fuck with it for a year's period only. And BIP110 makes temporarily unspendable any new op_if in Taproot with both the commit and reveal occurring during that one year period. Any preexisting op_if is grandfathered in.

Which means, that they will just sell BIP-110 coins for BTCs (if BIP-110 chain will work at all, and if it will have any miners, pushing it forward).

More nonsense. It's a soft fork. There will not be two separate coins. You won't sell one for the other because there will only be one single bitcoin with an internal soft fork.

Think about it, the tried to activate Segwit with a miner activation. That didn't go anywhere.

Sure, but Segwit didn't call old addresses "a spam", and didn't try to invalidate old coins by consensus rules.

Segwit didn't do any of that. Neither does BIP110.

If someone had a chain of timelocked P2PK transactions, then it was valid before Segwit, and it is still valid now.

Same with BIP110. It doesn't invalidate anyore-existinfg UTXOs.

Miners have no incentive to suddenly dish out a 50% discount to anyone.

And they have even less incentive to support changes, which could be used to freeze their own coins, if future developers will just call it "a spam", for arbitrary reasons.

[/quote]

BIP110 doesn't make any preexisting UTXO invalid or unspendable.
If you try to broadcast an op_return larger than 83 bytes, it will not be valid. Nodes and miners will reject it. You can wait until after BIP110 expires.

If you try to commit any coin in op_if in Taproot after BIP110 activates, the redeem will become unspendable until BIP110 expires a year later.