RT Luke de Wolf (@lukedewolf)I really agree with a lot of this sentiment at the moment.I think focusing on CSAM was a mistake.I'm against arbitrary data generally, and I support efforts to reach consensus to deal with this. But I think 444 does it in too blunt of a way (currently).Core's decision-making process and management structure leaves me quite disappointed in the alternative. At my most generous, I think they miss the forest for the trees.I think OCEAN, and DATUM are fantastic, and I really hope it ...

RT Without Rulers (@SentientFreedom)@hoNRuu95 @NickSzabo4 @HiyokoLP No, that's FUD. Luke started Knots but other developers contribute.Knots itself is a patched version of Core.It has filter fixes, more config options and sane defaults.Core has lineage with the original Satoshi project but is now a shitcoin crypto VC dumpster fire. ...

RT Nick Szabo (@NickSzabo4)@HiyokoLP Yes, I strongly recommend running Knots not Core. ...

RT Luke Dashjr (@LukeDashjr)Don't let the bad actors trick you into thinking Bitcoin Core 30 allows you to re-enable the datacarrier limit:1) Along with unlimiting the default, they also broke it further. datacarriersize=83 now (as of Core 30) allows for 83 outputs totalling 830 bytes of spam, instead of just 92 bytes of spam (9 bytes of which couldn't be arbitrary) as in Core 29 and earlier.2) datacarriersize is marked as deprecated, and explicitly planned to be removed in a future release (likely silently ...

Bitcoin Core vs Knots Explained (Feat. Pierre Rochard) #CHAINREACTION https://t.co/7e8qNcpb4t ...