HODLing Like I Mean It

#Bitcoin

[HODLing Like I Mean It @johnBTCdoe]

@SBakerMD All of the above.

[HODLing Like I Mean It @johnBTCdoe]

Love your work @jimmysong , but this is the same intellectual trap the likes of @lukedewolf and @giacomozucco fell into.

Every single revolution starts as a 'bad idea.' Heck, Bitcoin was a 'bad idea.' Saying 'we simply don't know the outcomes, so I can't support or oppose it' sounds like prudent neutrality, but the fact of the matter is that you're implicitly demanding perfect foresight before any change.
No one ever has full knowledge of complex system effects ahead of time. Pretending agnosticism is safe while others move is how you end up on the wrong side of history. We've seen this movie before across... (checks notes)... the history of humanity.

[Jimmy Song (송재준) @jimmysong]

https://t.co/vzJHwR8z1X

[Chris Guida | ⚡🪢 BIP110 @cguida6]

On Fence Sitting

An article by Chris Guida

If everyone sits on the fence when bad actors are attacking - surprise!

The bad actors win.

The End

[HODLing Like I Mean It @johnBTCdoe]

@TheBlueMatt Citation provided

https://t.co/YHUSYBpEbi

[Matt Corallo 🟠 @TheBlueMatt]

1/ It's long since time the bitcoin community spent a ton more effort on recruiting and ensuring underrepresented groups (incl women and especially folks with a different background) feel welcome in the community.

[HODLing Like I Mean It @johnBTCdoe]

Gloria is the closest thing a DEI hire can get to when it comes to Bitcoin development. She got to where she got to because liberal nutjobs like Matt Corallo prioritised "getting more women in Bitcoin".

As it's the case with every single hire that doesn't put competence as the 10 first criteria for a decision, it failed spectacularly.

[TFTC @TFTC21]

"She didn't own bitcoin. She didn't know very much about bitcoin."

Jeff Booth on traveling with Gloria Zhao in Africa.

[HODLing Like I Mean It @johnBTCdoe]

@1914ad Exactly.

[HODLing Like I Mean It @johnBTCdoe]

As someone who's a fan of Jason's work and loved his book, it's difficult to understand how he landed on a take that fundamentally misunderstands what makes permissionless systems work.

A permissionless network exists with rules and incentives precisely so anyone can use it without permission. The rules define the system. When you argue that things like opposing spam are "imposing ideology" means the network "stops being permissionless," you're erasing the distinction between open access and undermining the rules that define the system to begin with.

For example, the English language is a permissioneless system. It has rules and structure precisely so anyone can use it without asking permission. Anyone can speak, write, or innovate in English. But the moment you insist it must accommodate every possible use without pushback like constant shouting, flooding conversations with gibberish, inventing words that destroy clarity, or hijacking it for purposes that actively degrade communication for everyone else, it stops functioning as a reliable system.

Permissionlessness doesn't mean the protocol must accommodate every possible use case, no matter how it distorts incentives, raises costs for everyone, or undermines the system. That's not freedom, but rather a failure of governance by design. Real permissionless systems survive because they enforce boundaries that protect their primary function. The moment defenders stop doing that, the system gets captured or degraded.

Most of these defenders are silent and passive, so I'm thankful for the louder ones who care enough to do something about it, like @GrassFedBitcoin @LukeDashjr @parman_the @knutsvanholm and many others.

[Beautyon @Beautyon_]

Did you catch the break in this logic?

The first part cites the legitimate and rational Cause for Action associated with a large group of users who banded together to stop bitcoin being seized and spoiled by large corporations.

The second part suddenly switches to foul language ad hominem, a complete absence of any reference to facts.

Anyone who is not mind blind seeing this, will be…intrigued by the sudden switch in tenor and quality of argument. They’ll detect instantly that this sounds like a fallacy or illogic or weird or suspicious, without having to identify exactly which one is in play.

The misbehaviour that is common to all of the people (especially the anons, the worst of the worst) who are against BIP 110, even amongst men who are demonstrably highly intelligent individuals, would give any rational man instant paws because their behaviour is completely irrational their arguments, non-existent and their demeanour completely hysterical.

Anyone who behaves like this has something to hide, or is complicit, or has a grudge, or is simply completely irrational and detached from reality.

Any one of these behaviours are immediate disqualification if you’re looking for somebody who is objective and also who has the best interest of bitcoin at heart.

That these people can’t see that their behaviour is pushing many fence sitting users to BIP110 is further evidence of their complete mind blindness; they’re being painted into a corner with no escape route and perhaps presages the ultimate victory of bitcoin against contaminators.

[Softfork Mechanic #BIP-110 @GrassFedBitcoin]

@wk057 @TheBlueMatt Sir I think you missed the word "standardized" which means "I have to like the people involved"

[Softfork Mechanic #BIP-110 @GrassFedBitcoin]

If miners quit, the incentive to mine goes up.

If nodes quit, Bitcoin dies.

[HODLing Like I Mean It @johnBTCdoe]

@AdamBLiv 90% of your posts are about Strategy products. Your hypothesis is Strategy will become the most valuable company in the world.

We're on the same team Adam, but this post is just pure engagement farming.

[HODLing Like I Mean It @johnBTCdoe]

@matteopelleg Adam says "the behavior of the network changed" and that's true.

What he conveniently left out is that the bug that was being exploited was "fixed" by Core through changing the documentation and unilaterally deciding it was now a feature. It's not about "knowing how to set defaults".

[Count Dankula @CountDankulaTV]

They don't want people to figure out that if they just get off their arse they can fix their own community in 2 weeks. They want you to keep paying them taxes so they can fix your community for you. In 3 years. Maybe. Probably not.

[HODLing Like I Mean It @johnBTCdoe]

@chess_feed Because Knight to C6 checkmate is now unavoidable.

Black has two legal moves, which are Queen take D4 and Pawn to C5. Both defer the black Queen away from the defense of C6.

[HODLing Like I Mean It @johnBTCdoe]

Just rented some BIP110 supporting hashrate via https://t.co/PQ7kucVYFZ. An address, an email and some sats is all you need.

Shoutout to @parman_the!

[Parman BIP110 🔑 Bitcoin Self-Custody Mentor @parman_the]

NEW; You can pay sats to mine, and receive mined sats. No technical know-how required except paying an invoice.

https://t.co/vZw3F2bBXt helps decentralise mining, and the hash goes towards Datum/Ocean, which filters spam and signals for BIP110.

It's very easy, and various adoptions available, depending on timing (slower smooths out returns).

You can also generate and store a signed message, and IOU linking a payment address to a receiving-mining address... Any shenaniganary by PrivateHash can be publically exposed, and shame induced.

Minimum buy is only 50k sats, lightning or on-chain.

[HODLing Like I Mean It @johnBTCdoe]

I'm sorry Luke, but I read this entire post as a rationalization for 'like the idea but not unless near-zero risk'. This framing understates what's at stake and overweights the split fear. No changes in Bitcoin has ever been zero-risk, even though with overwhelming support.

That said, I agree with you that governance (meaning current Core dominance) and education matter more long-term. But BIP-110 is defense for the monetary focus right now. It just can't be 'perfect or nothing'. Satoshi didn't completely resolve the Byzantine General problem, but he was directionally correct and created something that's good enough and way better than any alternative at the time

Same logic can apply to BIP110. @CunyRenaud's research has demonstrated that as of this moment, it's about as close to perfect as it can get. Meanwhile we push better implementations and culture. If it activates cleanly, great. If not, the fight continues with clearer data on what works.

Sitting it out because it's not a silver bullet risks letting the Overton window drift further.

[HODLing Like I Mean It @johnBTCdoe]

As someone who's a fan of Jason's work and loved his book, it's difficult to understand how he landed on a take that fundamentally misunderstands what makes permissionless systems work.

A permissionless network exists with rules and incentives precisely so anyone can use it without permission. The rules define the system. When you argue that things like opposing spam are "imposing ideology" means the network "stops being permissionless," you're erasing the distinction between open access and undermining the rules that define the system to begin with.

For example, the English language is a permissioneless system. It has rules and structure precisely so anyone can use it without asking permission. Anyone can speak, write, or innovate in English. But the moment you insist it must accommodate every possible use without pushback like constant shouting, flooding conversations with gibberish, inventing words that destroy clarity, or hijacking it for purposes that actively degrade communication for everyone else, it stops functioning as a reliable system.

Permissionlessness doesn't mean the protocol must accommodate every possible use case, no matter how it distorts incentives, raises costs for everyone, or undermines the system. That's not freedom, but rather a failure of governance by design. Real permissionless systems survive because they enforce boundaries that protect their primary function. The moment defenders stop doing that, the system gets captured or degraded.

Most of these defenders are silent and passive, so I'm thankful for the louder ones who care enough to do something about it, like @GrassFedBitcoin @LukeDashjr @parman_the @knutsvanholm and many others.

[HODLing Like I Mean It @johnBTCdoe]

@chess_feed Because the black King has two legal moves:
- if Kh8, Qf6 is checkmate
- if King takes Queen, White plays Pawn takes e6 check, and no matter what the black King does, it ends with Rook takes Queen on d4.

So White is up a Rook for a Pawn.

[HODLing Like I Mean It @johnBTCdoe]

@adam3us It's been over two years since the spam "debate" started. @adam3us still doesn't understand the meaning of the word censorship.

Oh how the mighty have fallen...

[HODLing Like I Mean It @johnBTCdoe]

"I love Bitcoin, please buy my stock."

[Michael Saylor @saylor]

https://t.co/yeG4PgpjEq