[AMA] I am a proponent of the BIP-110 (a.k.a RDTS) - ask me anything

[stompix]

https://x.com/cguida6/status/2084653380194955653

When you go to x , you expect a shitshow
If you browse it or follow a link you expect to see people with crazy ideas, with crazy notions of things, politics, sports, music, movies, you know that you're running head-on into a cesspool.

But God!!! God!! I would have never expected that from a somewhat technical subject!
I would have understood if the nonsense was about NFT, meme coins, RWA, you name it, but....Bitcoin?

And what the fuck is that communist manifesto?
Punish the miners that don't signal, they will have to obey the nodes, god, the more I click the more I think I'm dreaming.

So I guess once the algo does change all 110 posts/threads do go to the altcoin section.

I think we need a new section in B&H : "How to avoid being a retard: Lessons from the Past"

[ABCbits]

https://x.com/cguida6/status/2084653380194955653

If they actually do it and manage to split the chain, i will prepare my popcorn and wait for someone to create TX that include controversial/questionable arbitrary data just to piss them off.

once the algo does change

Why should it change? They have a few EH/s working under double SHA-256, and signalling for their BIP. If they will switch to something else, then all of that will be lost. Even BCH didn't change the mining algorithm, but only changed the difficulty.

I found this code change on GitHub link mentioned on that X post.

+     argsman.AddArg("-powchangetime=time[:algo]", "Schedule a proof-of-work algorithm change at the given block time, selecting algo (0=SHA256, 1=SHA256d, 2=RIPEMD160, 3=HASH160, 4=rotate hourly; default 4). (regtest-only)", ArgsManager::ALLOW_ANY | ArgsManager::DEBUG_ONLY, OptionsCategory::DEBUG_TEST);

I don't know why RIPEMD160 or HASH160 even chosen in first place.

[athanred]

I don't know why RIPEMD160 or HASH160 even chosen in first place.

Probably they just picked something, which was already implemented. However, I guess some people simply don't know about collisions. Existing double SHA-256 block headers have around 80 leading zero bits, for example: 00000000000000000000e081e5715f5301b9fdcc917a1a6accfd011e79cee225

Maybe for RIPEMD-160, it will take some time to get there, to build proper ASICs, and to reach that kind of hashes, but still: if you have 160-bit hashes, and half of that hash will be set to zero, then miners will have a choice: mine the next block, or try to find a collision. And then, by finding collisions, it is possible to disrupt the network, by serving one value to one group of nodes, and another value to another group of nodes. Good luck doing Initial Blockchain Download later, when nodes won't know, which value is the original one, if both will give you the same hash.

If they actually do it and manage to split the chain, i will prepare my popcorn and wait for someone to create TX that include controversial/questionable arbitrary data just to piss them off.

When many people will suddenly receive the same amount of BIP-110 coins, then the first thing they could try, is selling these coins. But if that would be unsuccessful, because of lack of support from exchanges, then of course, many users may decide to burn everything into fees, just to upload some data, and show BIP-110 supporters, that their fix won't stop the spam.

[DaveF]

once the algo does change

Why should it change? They have a few EH/s working under double SHA-256, and signalling for their BIP. If they will switch to something else, then all of that will be lost. Even BCH didn't change the mining algorithm, but only changed the difficulty.

110 is a vengeance power fantasy as much as it is anything else... letting existing miners keep their hardware on it doesn't mesh with that agenda any more than making a reasonable proposal that bitcoin core might have adopted would have.

We also don't know what fraction of that hash power is rented-- it could easily be a majority of it -- and the cost of doing so will be unsustainable once they've forked.

Unless they are using some sort of mixer it would probably just take a little while to trace the payouts from ocean to the miners to MRR or NiceHash or one of the other rig rental places.
Last I checked, which does go back years and years and years, you sent BTC to NiceHash and after a few confirms it went into a known wallet address. Don't know if that changed after they got hacked.

In the end does it really matter. either they loose $ mining on a dead chain or they switch back to BTC, or they change the algo anyway and if they bought the miners they have to sell or mine on the main chain.

-Dave

[gmaxwell]

If they actually do it and manage to split the chain, i will prepare my popcorn and wait for someone to create TX that include controversial/questionable arbitrary data just to piss them off.

No need to wait for anything, their dreaded child abuse images have been there for years... and it's already known to at least Luke-jr.  So at the moment they bring the chain into existence they'll have them.  Wild thing is there it's entirely by choice-- since they're hardforking they could fairly easily just drop the whole history, essentially start the chain anew with just the utxo set (or a fresh altcoin)--- so they'd have the weird distinction of being the only node operators who were voluntarily adopting that stuff!

[DaveF]

If they actually do it and manage to split the chain, i will prepare my popcorn and wait for someone to create TX that include controversial/questionable arbitrary data just to piss them off.

No need to wait for anything, their dreaded child abuse images have been there for years... and it's already known to at least Luke-jr.  So at the moment they bring the chain into existence they'll have them.  Wild thing is there it's entirely by choice-- since they're hardforking they could fairly easily just drop the whole history, essentially start the chain anew with just the utxo set (or a fresh altcoin)--- so they'd have the weird distinction of being the only node operators who were voluntarily adopting that stuff!

And since it's been proven that 110 does nothing to slow down adding whatever data someone wants to blockchain how long do you think it's going to be till someone adds it back after the fork even if they purge everything.
Anyone want to start a betting pool?

-Dave

[ABCbits]

If they actually do it and manage to split the chain, i will prepare my popcorn and wait for someone to create TX that include controversial/questionable arbitrary data just to piss them off.

No need to wait for anything, their dreaded child abuse images have been there for years... and it's already known to at least Luke-jr.  So at the moment they bring the chain into existence they'll have them.

I specifically meant TX that created after BIP 110 rule enforced, which prove it's not as useful/effective as some BIP 110 supporter claim.

Wild thing is there it's entirely by choice-- since they're hardforking they could fairly easily just drop the whole history, essentially start the chain anew with just the utxo set (or a fresh altcoin)--- so they'd have the weird distinction of being the only node operators who were voluntarily adopting that stuff!

Not only that, they could offer "middle" option that still download and verify whole blockchain, but only store block starting from when BIP 110 activated.

[DaveF]

So as of this post it's been over 24 hours since the last 110 block.

Makes you wonder are they saving all their money to rent hash after Saturday? Saving their money to make a big push after the fork to try to do a chain split? Saving their money to try to find the fist blocks to make a statement?

Other?

-Dave

[stompix]

So as of this post it's been over 24 hours since the last 110 block.
Makes you wonder are they saving all their money to rent hash after Saturday? Saving their money to make a big push after the fork to try to do a chain split? Saving their money to try to find the fist blocks to make a statement?
Other?

Or it's just bad luck.
When your hashrate is just 2% you can have insane variations, looking through their blocks, they had empty periods 960883-960784, 960478-960353.
And what would a last offensive, even if 4-5% do? Steiner's counterattack? 

I saw on this site that they list "violations"
https://bip110.org/monitor#recent-signaling
So block 961281 has 4204 transactions and 30 "violations" , is there any website that aggregates this?
I'm curious how much of %tx and %space do these violations take!

[athanred]

I'm curious how much of %tx and %space do these violations take!

I guess nobody counted it, but there is a block explorer for that: https://mempool.kilombino.com/

And then, it can be compared with mempool.space.

[DaveF]

So as of this post it's been over 24 hours since the last 110 block.
Makes you wonder are they saving all their money to rent hash after Saturday? Saving their money to make a big push after the fork to try to do a chain split? Saving their money to try to find the fist blocks to make a statement?
Other?

Or it's just bad luck.
When your hashrate is just 2% you can have insane variations, looking through their blocks, they had empty periods 960883-960784, 960478-960353.
And what would a last offensive, even if 4-5% do? Steiner's counterattack?  

I saw on this site that they list "violations"
https://bip110.org/monitor#recent-signaling
So block 961281 has 4204 transactions and 30 "violations" , is there any website that aggregates this?
I'm curious how much of %tx and %space do these violations take!

Would not "do" anything. Just more of them trying to make their bizarre point. I know, trying to figure out the logic of crazy people.

Yes, it could be standard variance, them doing something odd also seems likely at this point.

In the end it really does not matter, just wondering if they are planning a one last stand kind of thing.

Guess we have to wait 2 1/2 days from now to see.


EDIT: And they just found a block. Guess it's just variance. Damn, was hoping for them to something "epic" in their minds so we could laugh about it later.

-Dave

[stompix]

EDIT: And they just found a block. Guess it's just variance. Damn, was hoping for them to something "epic" in their minds so we could laugh about it later.

Yeah, 2 percent, 144 blocks, that is roughly a 5% chance on basic probability,  so no real surprise here.
But then again, 5 blocks in the last 8 hours... who knows, maybe they are actively renting hashrate for a specified timeframe not 24/7?

Either way it's idiotic.

I'm curious how much of %tx and %space do these violations take!

I guess nobody counted it, but there is a block explorer for that: https://mempool.kilombino.com/

Seems like there are way less "violations" and frog pics than they claim, at least in the few blocks I checked, randomly clicking I haven;t found a block with over 50% iof them.

[DaveF]

...Yeah, 2 percent, 144 blocks, that is roughly a 5% chance on basic probability,  so no real surprise here.
But then again, 5 blocks in the last 8 hours... who knows, maybe they are actively renting hashrate for a specified timeframe not 24/7?...

Someone someplace made a comment that they paid for a bunch of rentals and are still adding money to it, but the pattern looked for a while like they were waiting for the 101 blocks to mature before recycling the BTC to rent more.

Was going to look for coin movements to see if that was true, but just never really felt the urge to spend the time.

Either way, at best they are going to get 3% this period.

34 hours from this post they get to figure it out all on their own.

-Dave

[gmaxwell]

https://x.com/steverabinow/status/2085703735762698466

[Satofan44]

If they actually do it and manage to split the chain, i will prepare my popcorn and wait for someone to create TX that include controversial/questionable arbitrary data just to piss them off.

No need to wait for anything, their dreaded child abuse images have been there for years... and it's already known to at least Luke-jr.  So at the moment they bring the chain into existence they'll have them.

I specifically meant TX that created after BIP 110 rule enforced, which prove it's not as useful/effective as some BIP 110 supporter claim.

Fair point, but AFAIK there have already been cases in the past that have demonstrated various methods of embedding data that is completely compliant with BIP 110. This combined with the existence of all sorts of data that has been stored in Bitcoin has long proved the futility of this game. Anyway, the facts are on one side and a power grab attempt by CSAM obsessed people is on the other. Remember usually when people are obsessed with something like this it is because they are projecting the things that they are doing, therefore this is probably done by people who already have CSAM repositories themselves, OP being such a person. There is again a recent demonstration of this kind of transaction:

https://x.com/steverabinow/status/2085703735762698466

I am looking forward to their chain split, although I still doubt that they will go through with this. Usually people who bark loudly are the weakest, furthermore by doing a chain split they will completely delegitimize themselves as Bitcoin people towards their own shitcoin and there is no going back from that. Roger Ver ruined his reputation with his delusions and became an enemy of Bitcoin, and so will this crowd.

[ABCbits]

https://x.com/steverabinow/status/2085703735762698466

Besides what mentioned on his X post, it also very cost-efficient to embed arbitrary data.
1. It embed data inside P2WPKH witness data, so it's also benefit from witness discount.
2. Based on first input witness data, the overhead is also small.

Code:

OP_PUSHNUM_1
OP_NOTIF
OP_PUSHDATA1 [510 hex char]
OP_PUSHDATA1 [510 hex char]
OP_PUSHDATA1 [510 hex char]
OP_PUSHDATA1 [510 hex char]
OP_PUSHDATA1 [510 hex char]
OP_PUSHDATA1 [510 hex char]
OP_ENDIF
OP_PUSHNUM_1

It's almost as cost efficient as Ordinal. https://mempool.kilombino.com/tx/9c34287f805e622b86ac140ef10475750214cf60c3310441b9b9ea9f429bb1bc?showFlow=false also confirm this TX doesn't violate any BIP 110 rule/check.

[Greg Tonoski]

Beautiful day for Bitcoiners. We are witnessing the test of decentralization of Bitcoin. The BIP-110 will be activated around 22:00 UTC today.

[Dark.Look]

So as of this post it's been over 24 hours since the last 110 block.
Makes you wonder are they saving all their money to rent hash after Saturday? Saving their money to make a big push after the fork to try to do a chain split? Saving their money to try to find the fist blocks to make a statement?
Other?

Or it's just bad luck.
When your hashrate is just 2% you can have insane variations, looking through their blocks, they had empty periods 960883-960784, 960478-960353.
And what would a last offensive, even if 4-5% do? Steiner's counterattack?  

I saw on this site that they list "violations"
https://bip110.org/monitor#recent-signaling
So block 961281 has 4204 transactions and 30 "violations" , is there any website that aggregates this?
I'm curious how much of %tx and %space do these violations take!

@stompix
the aggregate you're asking for would answer a different question than the one you want answered.
It seems like @ABCbits posted a tx a couple of hours ago that stuffs data into P2WPKH witness and passes every 110 check clean here:

Besides what mentioned on his X post, it also very cost-efficient to embed arbitrary data.
1. It embed data inside P2WPKH witness data, so it's also benefit from witness discount.
2. Based on first input witness data, the overhead is also small.

Code:

OP_PUSHNUM_1
OP_NOTIF
OP_PUSHDATA1 [510 hex char]
OP_PUSHDATA1 [510 hex char]
OP_PUSHDATA1 [510 hex char]
OP_PUSHDATA1 [510 hex char]
OP_PUSHDATA1 [510 hex char]
OP_PUSHDATA1 [510 hex char]
OP_ENDIF
OP_PUSHNUM_1

It's almost as cost efficient as Ordinal. https://mempool.kilombino.com/tx/9c34287f805e622b86ac140ef10475750214cf60c3310441b9b9ea9f429bb1bc?showFlow=false also confirm this TX doesn't violate any BIP 110 rule/check.

So it's measuring violations, not how much data is in the block and that up for thousand blocks and it's going to fall on its own as the spamers jump to the compliant methods they'll see the drop and know that they've been fixed already.
What would settle it is the percentage of block weight that expends no witness data. That one's not yet published.
Do they observe their own monitor flag the tx ABCbits or does it pass there as well?

[athanred]

What would settle it is the percentage of block weight that expends no witness data.

How do you want to move coins, without making it spendable by anyone, if you use no witness data? Each and every signature can be used to push at least some data. For example:

Code:

<signature1> OP_SWAP OP_CHECKSIGVERIFY
<signature2> OP_SWAP OP_CHECKSIGVERIFY
...
<signatureN> OP_SWAP OP_CHECKSIGVERIFY
OP_CODESEPARATOR
OP_DUP OP_HASH160 <address> OP_EQUALVERIFY OP_CHECKSIG

And then, it can be P2WSH, signed by Knots, Core, or whatever, in the same way, as you can sign "<address>", because of OP_CODESEPARATOR. Actually, in cases like that, signatures would be a part of checked consensus rules, because public key recovery would have to match exactly for all recovered public keys, and a single "real" signature would protect the destination.

See? It is compatible with BIP-110, it contains only public keys and signatures, and can be used to push arbitrary data, 64 bytes per signature. Which means something around 60-70% efficiency, when you compare it with other methods (64 bytes for signature, 32 bytes for public key, so something like 64/96 bytes per data chunk, plus some single bytes for DER encoding, and stack pushes).

[stompix]

@stompix
the aggregate you're asking for would answer a different question than the one you want answered.
It seems like @ABCbits posted a tx a couple of hours ago that stuffs data into P2WPKH witness and passes every 110 check clean here:
~
So it's measuring violations, not how much data is in the block and that up for thousand blocks and it's going to fall on its own as the spamers jump to the compliant methods they'll see the drop and know that they've been fixed already.

My curiosity was from another reason, I was just trying to figure out how many transactions that BIP110 guys saw as "violations" are actually there and how much space they are using, to figure out what the percentages are that freaked them out and labeled them as an attack on Bitcoin.
Do they claim the blockchain is polluted, and their own filters show only 2-3% of tx and maybe 5% of space will be "cleaned" after or is it more, much more, or even less than that?

Now, in other non-news and not really news since it's a fact years old, Luke has lost his marbles, probably after grinding them and smoking them cause:
https://x.com/LukeDashjr/status/2085810106826956946

~24 hours until signaling BIP110 becomes mandatory for Bitcoin miners.
Mining blocks without signaling will then forfeit all block rewards!

66 blocks to go...