Bitcoin only. Fuck your fork, filter, and your feelings.
Wisconsin
- Tweets 1,069
- Following 29
- Followers 55
- Likes 103
Pinned Tweet
A developer who forks Bitcoin's UTXO set but refuses to add mandatory two-way replay protection is attacking everyday users. It’s a deliberate tactic to force engineering chaos and trap sell supply. Real projects protect users; grifts weaponize them.
2
62
"Don't move anything" is what every fork says the week it launches.
You don't move because the old coins stay on the old chain.
The new ones are a copy with a brochure.
8
If you have to watch two chains to know which money you have, one of them is extra.
Bitcoin users didn't sign up for a second verifier.
The extra work is the product. It isn't a feature of Bitcoin.
1
20
You're advocating for developer-enforced price controls. In a free market, goods go to whoever values them most. Banning buyers because you dislike their data so your transaction is cheaper is literal market manipulation. Bitcoin scales payments on L2, not via censorship. Grifter
No… given Bitcoin’s monetary purpose and design, Spam fees introduce incoherent signals to the system and make it more expensive to use Bitcoin for Money than it would be otherwise with less/zero Spam.
This is common sense economics and BitThereans don’t get it. Sad.
187
"Negatively impacts price signaling" is pseudo-economic gibberish. Price discovery means users bid sats for scarce blockspace, and miners include the highest payers. Trying to ban fee-paying demand to protect your subjective idea of "pure" data is central planning.
It’s still total dead weight on chain/nodes.. plus, fees from non-monetary data negatively impact the price signaling feedback loop between fees/rewards, hashrate, and difficulty.
Just because Op_Return doesn’t create extra UTXO bloat on Bitcoin, doesn’t justify its use.
1
350
A user-activated softfork that fails is a rejected change.
A hash swap after that failure is a hardfork. Those are not the same event.
They lost the first vote, then changed the exam.
5
OP_RETURN exists specifically to prevent UTXO bloat by making metadata provably unspendable. Bitcoin doesn't need to "act on it" for it to provide an immutable timestamp or proof anchor. Calling all secondary layer validation a scam is peak developer arrogance.
I call BS… and there’s a peg in and peg out mechanism🚩
Silent Payments seems solid afaict… but “Shielded Bitcoin” seems like bullshit hype on the face of it… Fact checks welcome.
1
177
First they couldn't get the rule. Then they named the leftover fake.
That's the sequence. The rename comes after the loss.
Bitcoin didn't become fake because they needed it to.
17
Calling SHA-256d “suitcoin” doesn’t make Blake2b Bitcoin.
Ignoring a minority BIP isn’t a hard fork of the majority chain. Changing the hash is.
XBT is ISO for the live SHA-256d coin. New PoW = left.
lol 🤣 "2nd" version
XBT is Bitcoin
Suitcoin is not Bitcoin, they hardforked by ignoring bip110 ruleset. they ignored the tightest common ruleset between popular node implementations.
and two nodes have full control over suitcoin, they can do any softfork they want. its a cbdc.
1
1
68
“XBT - Bitcoin blake2b” is the pitch.
XBT is the ISO ticker for SHA-256d Bitcoin. New Proof-of-Work means new coin.
Accumulate an empty book if you want. Don’t call it the network that kept the users.
Check out my full thesis post (and video in reply)
XBT - Bitcoin blake2b
Slow accumulation for next 2-10 months,
Hopefully massive sending occurs in 2028
1
2
61
Checking a block is not minting a coin.
The subsidy is valuable because people already want Bitcoin.
A longer lock on a new chain doesn't borrow that demand. It rewrites the job.
7
Calling SHA-256d a “barter marketplace” doesn’t promote Blake2b into money.
Sound money is permissionless settlement under one PoW. Filters are local policy.
New hash, new coin. The slogan stayed; the network didn’t.
Them: Competitive currencies just brings us back to barter! Your BLAKE2b chain is just a barter token! Money is winner take all! Reee!
Me: Bitcoin competes as Money. BitThereum competes as a barter marketplace for Shitcoins, DickButts, Fiat, etc.
Just my 2b sats. Filters up!🛡️
245
Imagine building a "decentralized" proof-of-work network and then crying that the miners are "hostile" because they won't bend the knee to your developer mandates. Peak central planning.
11
