antbit #BIP-110

bitcoin only

[antbit #BIP-110 @antbit]

"What is it about Core as a process that is causing all these bugs? These bugs are a result of a culture that makes everyone feel afraid to question anyone that is part of the untouchable clique at the center of it...

So you have a few wizards at the top who's egos can never be touched or questioned, and you have all of their lackeys below them who will remain in the places they are in and be very careful not to offend the people, that way they can maintain their position and continue up the hierarchy, and theyll continue getting grants and funding.. those people will continue to exist, and they will continue screwing up as people get their energy drained out from the war that's going on...

Everything gets discussed behind closed doors now, and if you dare question anything that happens in public, you're out. You're never going to have anything you ever write or propose in Bitcoin again be considered seriously, its just going to die."

[Softfork Mechanic #BIP-110 @GrassFedBitcoin]

People need to stop deferring to @giacomozucco for their opinions on BIP110. His stance is one long rationalization for inaction in a circumstance where it's deeply needed.

[antbit #BIP-110 @antbit]

@venorusprime @FieldNas If that’s what it takes to not be stuck with those four bozos.

[antbit #BIP-110 @antbit]

@adam3us Retarded take.

[Jim | RDTS | Bitcoin, not jpegs @venorusprime]

Make sure you share with your favorite influencoors.

@_DannyKnowles @natbrunell @bramk @AdamBLiv @PunterJeff @RobinSeyr @SimplyBitcoin @IIICapital @Croesus_BTC

[Adam Longhorn @AdamLonghorn]

Hi All. My wife and I run a Tex-Mex restaurant in Krakow, Poland called 'Los Gorditos' (we welcome you!).

I felt compelled to speak up today so here is goes: Spam is spam, scammers gonna scam, inflation is theft, and Bitcoin is money. Please support BIP-110. Thank you.

[antbit #BIP-110 @antbit]

@spoonmvn These saylor simps will go to their deathbed defending him. They will soon realize what a mistake that is.

[antbit #BIP-110 @antbit]

Do what the man says, people. Being a hash employer couldn't be easier, and the KYC-free sats mined in return? Worth it. Not to mention controlling industrial levels of hash with zero fire risk. Seems like a no-brainer to me.

[Jim | RDTS | Bitcoin, not jpegs @venorusprime]

Yet another advantage of being a hash employer over a home miner. The hashers have to manage the fire risk. I just worry about paying them.

For that I get to control industrial levels of hash, signal for the BIPs I support, assign jobs to the hashers through my block template, and I don't have to worry about my house burning down all while harvesting ~97% of those sats in clean, KYC-free, coinbase rewards.

C'mon plebs. What are you waiting for? https://t.co/xR8VkpCRpB

[Matthew R. Kratter #BIP-110 @mattkratter]

Suitcoiners are this cycle's shitcoiners

[Luke Dashjr @LukeDashjr]

If you don't want Bitcoin to change to allow data storage (ie, Core30), then you want BIP110.

BIP110 is just itself a counter-fork to reject Core30's controversial changes.

Without it, a tiny fringe minority would have succeeded in materially changing Bitcoin without consensus.

[antbit #BIP-110 @antbit]

@sesi_the_man @Campnakamoto Great pano! Beautiful day in NH.

[Softfork Mechanic #BIP-110 @GrassFedBitcoin]

Heh, if you:

1. Have a timelocked UTXO that doesn't become spendable until > blockheight 965,664 (assuming latest possible activation)
2. That you already have a pre-signed commitment for that sends to a taproot address containing OP_IF and no key path which for some reason you cannot recreate in a way that's spendable
3. That if left unspend until blockheight 1,018,080, can be "stolen" (i.e spent another way that you specifically allowed for as one of the spending conditions)

Then....wow! You have to move your funds to another - in effect - timelocked address for (worst case) ~52,000 blocks (~1 year). Remember, it doesn't mean you can't create the new UTXO, it means that if you create it with hidden conditions that render it temporarily unspendable upon reveal, you have to wait. Effectively just another timelock. (Of course the point of taproot is *not revealing alternate spending conditions separated with OP_IFs and doing things more efficiently and privately with leaves, but I disgress from this hypothetical which assumes we're somehow simultaneously accommodating the world's most sophisticated *and* dumbest taproot user....)

If the precommitted TX for some offchain reason must be spent to *yet another* timelocked address that itself can only be "not stolen from" (i.e plan B'd) and righteously consumed by you (i.e plan A'd) by spending it prior to some other blockheight where it becomes "stealable" by your children or whoever you expressly ultimately created a condition for as a back up then yeah - you finally have a scenario where the money went to plan B instead of plan A. This is avoidable unless you want to pretend that precomitted transactions are something Bitcoin will enforce (it doesn't, and it never will, until covenants happen).

It's hard to say "In real world scenarios, someone in this situation would simply discard the committed, pre-signed transaction" because this isn't a real world scenario. It's a theoretical situation that doesn't realistically exist so it feels entirely incongruent to start offering real world solutions because we're so divorced from anything realistic.

Again, the simple truth is that you can say "I am going to make an unspendable output per the rules of this incoming soft fork". This is possible with pretty much any soft fork. It is not our problem, it is your problem. And here are all the ways you can work around it if you really are inconvenienced by RDTS -

1. Move funds before it activates
2. Accept temporary timelock if moving them after
3. If timelocked to within unfortunate window and committed to bad address that must be spent *from* with a *second* unfortunate window, (both times to avoid "theft" aka a condition you intentionally committed to that was simply not your ideal scenario) consuming a second, new, non-grandfathered UTXO - then you simply have to change the commitment. Simply send the funds to a proper address with the *first* transaction so that you don't create a scenario where you commit to an impossible plan A and thus make plan B the only option.

Trying to be as realistic as I can be ignoring how vanishingly unlikely this scenario is, your kids are getting inheritance money sooner than everyone expected. You presumably have a bad relationship with them so it cannot be resolved after the fact even though for some reason they were intended to be the recipient of your Bitcoins. Somehow you created a time-permitting mechanism for them to become owners of your coins that you could continuously stave off with a dead-man's-switch that cannot be changed and would only ever require mere months of inaction on your part to become executable.

Riiiight. Fun cypherpunk though experiment for sure! Zero people are in this situation because if doing it for real - they know what BIP110 is and how to work around it all, and I'll hazard a guess in pointing out that they know how to use taproot without wasting a bunch of space crudely dumping in script structures from P2SH and making their spends reveal more info than necessary. Again, they're the world's most advanced users of taproot. They aren't going to be doing dumb stuff like that.

Scenario three is the one where the world's cleverst and dumbest taproot user somehow morphed in to one entity that has the worst luck imaginable and for some reason can't change his mind about how he generates UTXO A.

I can concede that there's a scenario where funds can end up in the less desirable location out of multiple pre-determined locations. I cannot concede that the ingredients necessary for such a situation are realistically ever going to all occur in unison within a one-year window.

[Softfork Mechanic #BIP-110 @GrassFedBitcoin]

Important overlooked point. The "blocksize limit" is variable - it's not fixed, it depends on what is being put in the chain.

Input spam can take blocks all the way up to the theoretical maximum that was never expected when coming up with the "block weight" concept.

Result? The blockchain raced to 1TB faster than expected and continues to grow faster than it should have.

[antbit #BIP-110 @antbit]

Again with the "slop" nonsense. What's wilder is calling Bitcoin Core an incredibly transparent project. These people aren't serious, they just say whatever keeps the bags pumping. Truly pathetic.

[Matt Corallo 🟠 @TheBlueMatt]

@BitMEXResearch @hodlonaut @JoeNakamoto The ironic thing is the only real takeaway from @hodlonaut ‘s slop is that Bitcoin Core is an *incredibly* transparent project. Funders and discussion are nearly entirely out in the open for people to pick random quotes from and form any opinion their LLM agrees with.

[Renaud Cuny @CunyRenaud]

BIP-110 coming soon.

Are you ready?

[antbit #BIP-110 @antbit]

@FieldNas Well said.

[Hammond of Texas | BIP-110🌽 @FieldNas]

If we the plebs succeed in clawing Bitcoin back from the marxist takeover, we will have proven, even in this late day and age, free men with courage can still overcome evil. The war for freedom, that we're losing badly in meatspace, under outdated structures, cannot be lost in Bitcoin, or we are all truly lost. This is the last stand.

Stay and fight, keep the lion's share of your wealth in Bitcoin, shun shitcoins and snonks, run a full Knots BIP110 node, open 8333, mine your share (even a single bitaxe) and signal it via DATUM for BIP110.

And run your mouth! Ridicule the communists, mock them, berate them for their nonsense, because they make no sense. They're not smart people, they're liars, scammers, pedos and thieves with credentials and either false or malicious intelligence. I don't need to tell you to argue in good faith, that's a given. You are better than them; you are good. We are the good guys. Never doubt that.

[antbit #BIP-110 @antbit]

@mattkratter It’s genuinely disheartening to see so many bag holders in complete denial of the situation they now find themselves in. People who are still defending Saylor and his products really need to open their eyes. But if not, their eyes will be opened soon enough.

[Softfork Mechanic #BIP-110 @GrassFedBitcoin]

Yes it disallows creating new P2PK outputs - even though Satoshi used them😱. Satoshi also used P2IP. That's not a thing any more either.

I don't know any wallets beyond Core (where it's disabled in the GUI and you have to use CLI) that can even generate P2PK addresses any more. It's dead and the only reason you'd use it today is to add junk data to the chain.

>messes up people's inheritance plans if they use OP_IF in Tapscript. This will freeze user funds. I have spoken to people with Bitcoin in these contracts that will lose their Bitcoin if BIP-110 activates

Nope, they're all grandfathered. Without exception. Zero UTXOs get frozen by BIP110 which is his insinuation.

Please understand that the correct claim here isn't:

"My Bitcoins will become unspendable due to BIP110" (which of course is what bitmex falsely implies)

It's: "I am deliberately going to move my Bitcoins after BIP110 activates to an address I cannot spend from until ~Sep 2027".

These are not the same things.

[antbit #BIP-110 @antbit]

@oomahq @uanbtc He evidently can’t handle the truth, or he’s pulling strings for his higher-ups. “Advocating” for Bitcoin but staying neutral at times like this shows how much of a coward he really is.