Time Chain

It helps those of us with children. With Iran in its current form the world will be an unsafe terrorist laden shithole in 20 - 30 years. The only part of my taxes I am happy to part with and is arguably the only thing the government is authorized to do.

2026-03-21 21:43:15 UTC

- reply

I am sick of influencers. They are all cons that provide little, if any, value to society. Kinda like government.

2026-03-20 22:41:40 UTC

- reply

To increase confidence in the BIP-110 node percentage I recommend running over clearnet with port 8333 forwarded on your router. Even well resourced attackers would have a hard time goosing those numbers.

2026-03-20 11:45:53 UTC

- reply

The metaberse was always a front. He wanted the company to change the name to Meta as in metadata but that would have longterm reputation risk. The $80 billion wasn’t squandered, it just gave the company the ability to create a toxic name out of a toxic practice in plain sight without anyone being the wiser.

2026-03-17 02:50:43 UTC

- reply

Running a node must be inexpensive for bitcoin to survive. With the rising cost of SSDs, storage is becoming a real issue, but I agree with Matt that RAM and bandwidth, etc are primarily the most important and make node operation an elite endeavor. Destroy this attack vector and center all arguments around the cost to operate a node.

2026-03-12 18:10:29 UTC

- reply

Totally agree. The only slippery slope is doing nothing while spam is flooding the chain. Gotta Rug the Spammers with BIP-110.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dYA9vYa0iwQ

2026-03-12 14:46:36 UTC

- reply

Maybe both?

2026-03-12 12:11:17 UTC

- reply

All facts. Nodes must run the show. BIP-110 brings that back into alignment.

2026-03-08 00:28:31 UTC

- reply

That X comment only confirms what I have said all along. There is no legitimate market for jpegs on bitcoin. This is VC spammers trying to create a bitcoin "OpenSea" with high asymmetric return from a few niche suckers. They are running scared now that they understand how effective BIP-110 will be. Pure genius in design. The timing is perfection.

2026-03-06 19:59:19 UTC

- reply

Excellent site. He does a fantastic job of illustrating the spam attacks on multiple dimensions. Proof of work at its best.
Ivan Pustogarov in 2015 explained that running bitcoin over tor introduces risk to the network. It is true that you don't have to open port 8333 on your router with tor, but depending on another node network for uptime (only 8,000 to 10,000 tor relays worldwide) gives me some pause on weighing privacy pros and cons. However, with rising spam (and potentially illegal content) on the network, clearnet may pose an even greater risk in the future.
Not spreading FUD on network configuration or anything, just objectively analyzing the security and privacy tradeoffs. Your node, your rules. Your keys, your coins.

2026-03-06 13:00:16 UTC

- reply

I wish there was BIP that could rug "influencers". @nprofile…fg9w would make that list. Empty shells pretending to know what they are talking about.

2026-03-06 12:55:38 UTC

- reply

Isn't this the exact opposite position of Ivan Pustogarov from 2015?
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gd5NZvsyAfw&pp=ygUWQml0Y29pbiBvdmVyIHRvciByaXNrcw%3D%3D

2026-03-06 10:38:14 UTC

- reply

Tone offers nothing to the table. He has a surface level understanding of basic principles and is completely wrong on a host of issues. Why do bitcoiners listen to this clown?

2026-03-04 04:23:44 UTC

- reply

But can they?
It has been Bitcoin Core's job to eradicate security vulnerabilities that threaten the network and they have been poor stewards to that end.
This is why we need BIP-110. We need to stop relying on a co-opted development team and start treated bitcoin for what it was always intended to be.

2026-03-03 17:59:54 UTC

- reply

Excellent video. All 4 on the list are security vulnerabilities that we need to eradicate. BIP-110 is needed to finally put this long standing concern to rest.

2026-03-01 09:45:58 UTC

- reply

Government has only one role, which is to keep its citizens safe from aggressors foreign and domestic. Finally, the US government did something useful with its citizens tax dollars. Now, if we can only get it to stop using the printing press... 🤔

2026-02-28 03:11:32 UTC

- reply

Miners are employees of the network. The network is controlled by nodes because node runners own the land where bitcoin lives. The miners are but serfs on the land. The extra fees from spam dust are not a strong enough incentive when only a couple of miners have the spam profitting VC firms backing them. When other miners can easily get more blocks and coinbase on a clean chain they switch over and leave the spam blocks to die.

2026-02-27 20:57:01 UTC

- reply

The part about the government censorship really leaves my head scratching. Wasn't Satoshi concerned about WikiLeaks?
In any case, what if it is I, and not the government, who is concerned about relaying images rather than legitimate transactions? Isn't it my node? That is not addressed in this piece.

2026-02-27 18:06:06 UTC

- reply

A Bitcoin Node Runner’s 7 Rules for Self-Sovereignty
1. Nodes enforce the rules.
Bitcoin’s consensus is enforced by nodes — not miners, not developers, not companies. If you don’t run a node, you are trusting someone who does.
2. Lightweight is not optional — it is the defense.
Bitcoin was engineered so ordinary people can verify it. If running a node becomes expensive or complex, decentralization erodes. Accessibility is a security model.
3. Raising node costs weakens the network.
Any proposal that materially increases hardware, bandwidth, or storage requirements must be treated as a potential centralizing force. The base layer exists for secure monetary settlement — nothing more.
4. Bitcoin is a protocol, not an industry.
There is no “Bitcoin industry” to protect. There is only a protocol individuals use to store and transfer value. Changes that serve corporate or non-monetary agendas over monetary integrity undermine the system.
5. Stewardship requires action.
If someone claims to defend Bitcoin’s monetary purpose but tolerates base-layer expansion that threatens decentralization, their incentives deserve scrutiny.
6. Open source is part of sovereignty.
Bitcoin is open-source software. Running it on proprietary systems introduces dependence. Sovereignty and closed platforms do not align.
7. Convenience is not sovereignty.
Corporate-packaged node solutions, auto-update containers, and “one-click” systems may reduce friction — but they increase trust assumptions. Real sovereignty means minimizing reliance on third parties.

2026-02-27 18:05:24 UTC

- reply

2026-02-27 12:46:46 UTC

- reply

What is a Bitcoin company? Are there BitTorrent companies?

2026-02-27 05:19:16 UTC

2026-02-25 18:40:06 UTC

- reply

It is not about purity. It is about sovereignty. What are the arguments for why I should run Core on my $85 Lenovo? Shouldn't I be free to run an implementation that doesn't clog up my ram or drive with gamified spam? Isn't bitcoin FOSS? I don't care if someone wants to have a clogged mempool and relay VC garbage but why should I not have a choice? If the argument is obvious, the convince a pleb like me to run Core.

2026-02-25 17:22:53 UTC

- reply

There are way too many weak arguments by Odell. It is easy for him to "stay humble and stack sats" while he collects "bitcoin industry" revenue to pay his expenses. There is no bitcoin industry the same way the BitTorrent protocol is not an industry. It is FOSS, and those who seek revenue from "developing" or "programming" it are an attack vector.

2026-02-24 11:47:25 UTC

Satoshi never called bitcoin programmable money. It was always an "electronic cash system".
This means it replaces your bank account (store of value), can be transferred at any time peer-to-peer (medium of exchange), and is secure and profitable enough to occupy a majority stake in your net worth (thus becoming a unit of account).
It is time to retire stupid phrases like "programmable money".

2026-02-24 11:41:44 UTC

- reply

There no other use cases. VC firms are spamming the network with garbage trying to hack it into an "OpenSea" style project. They are attacking bitcoin and Core will not stop it willingly. Rug the Spammers.

2026-02-23 19:31:50 UTC

Learn the Scam, and Rug the Spammers
1. VC firms salivate over the success of NFTs on Ethereum's OpenSea.
2. Capital outlays worth a few hundred Bitcoin can be divided into tens of millions of spamdust that can be attached to an AI generated worthless JPEG.
3. Half of the VC capital goes to pay miners which is either sunk cost or recuperated through investment in spam mining pools.
4. If the "Bitcoin OpenSea" projects fail, but Bitcoin rallies by multiples, then the coins can be recuperated and UTXO set will shrink to normal. This recuperation allows VC capital to have a "heads I win, tails I don't lose" approach. (Best case scenario)
5. If the projects succeed, UTXO set will stay permanently bloated as many worthless JPEGs attached to dust transactions will continue exist. These will serve to pretend to have a broad and vibrant digital art gallery giving "value" to a few choice pieces.
6. You only need a few JPEGs to have radical value for the Scam to pay off handsomely.
Run Bitcoin Knots with BIP-110 and Rug the Spammers.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dYA9vYa0iwQ

2026-02-23 14:53:05 UTC

- reply

Your article fails to address that a chain split is not a bug but a feature. Ideally there would be no chain split but for real bitcoiners our transactions will be on both chains. Only jpeggers and UTXO dust peddlers would be negatively impacted ... which is the whole point of the softfork. If the chain does not get the traction it properly deserves then so be it. My node will be leaner. My enforcement of the bitcoin rules will be closer to its origins and if successful, we Rug the Spammers.
Bitcoin doesn't get its credibility from noncontentious culture. Remember the block size wars? Bitcoin gets its credibility because there is only one true chain. BIP-110 is asymmetry for real bitcoiners. We lose nothing and VC capital freeloading on nodes and corrupt miners can no longer abuse the commons.
Since Core v.30 Bitcoin has lost over half its value. I don't think it is coincidence in timing. The VCs and the miners they support need spam to stay in business. Block reward is everything and they will unplug with each halving or hack their way into getting more fees. Rug these assholes by bringing bitcoin back to its origins.

2026-02-23 11:56:34 UTC

- reply

If your opinions are not tied down by investors, then why is there no serious discussion for why BIP-110 is bad? Calling a softfork that fixes a problem one client on a protocol created is not an attack on bitcoin.

2026-02-21 22:20:17 UTC

- reply

Bitcoin runs on FOSS. There are too many businesses trying to profit from bitcoin without actually acquiring any. VC are turning their investment capital into spam dust hoping for radical asymmetry modeled from OpenSea. The VC transactions are financing miners who will be exiting stage left with each halving.
Odell blasts Strategy for accummulating BTC, but not business actors making actual protocol changes and hacks that put bitcoin at risk. The Core vs Knots "debate" is corporate VC stonewalling to the max. All this AI generated filth (Runes and other stupid shit) is not good for nodes. The backed up sewer mempool and a UTXO bloat on its way to 90% spam does not seem to be an issue worthy of discussion to these people.
There is only one simple solution, which is to follow Szabo and Rug the Spammers.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dYA9vYa0iwQ

2026-02-19 20:51:35 UTC

- reply

I would add that mining is not an industry. They are employees of the network and they are only profitable at current hashrate while there is still coinbase to be earned. Over the next decade many will unplug.

2026-02-19 18:47:57 UTC

- reply

You can also update on a regular install using this:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dYA9vYa0iwQ

2026-02-19 03:33:30 UTC

- reply

Run a node for less than $100 by running a pruned node. Electrum and Lightning are overrated in my opinion. Do IBD once, make backup snapshots, and you never need to again.
Verify your wallet whenever you feel like it with:
bitcoin-cli gettxout <txid> <vout>
My node, my rules. But no matter how you choose to run it ... make sure it is Knots with BIP-110. Game theory is on OUR side.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dYA9vYa0iwQ

2026-02-15 22:57:44 UTC

- reply

Running Knots has a lighter mempool and feels more in tune with Bitcoin philosophy/history. This data storage use case feels uncomfortable and dangerous.

2026-02-15 22:53:26 UTC

- reply

It is not about saving bitcoin from spam. It is about not storing, relaying g or promoting it.

2026-02-15 20:04:54 UTC

- reply

All it takes is one controversial image.

2026-02-15 15:31:14 UTC

- reply

Rationalizing this as a scheme that is "cooked up" is failure to recognize that people are genuinely concerned about spam and the op_return fiasco. My pruned snapshot from 2023 is 5 gb and is now 12 gb. The spam debate is real, grassroots, and node runners have the right to be concerned and take whatever action is needed when the conventional maintainers are derelict in their duty to protect node runner interests. We need UTXO combining and every wallet a node or able to connect to a trusted node. Spam is taking us away from that goal.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dYA9vYa0iwQ

2026-02-14 16:35:59 UTC

- reply

Its not monetary if it will never be combined. Bitcoin was not designed to hold endless UTXOS forever. There cannot be 2.1 quadrillion UTXOs and we should not try. Combining is necessary for money. Spam inhibits that.

2026-02-14 16:20:14 UTC

- reply

I don't think bitcoin is "doomed". I think it sucks. I got into bitcoin when it was good. Spam is lame and its supporters and apologists are compromising the best monetary network the world has ever seen. It may become existential when 90% of the UTXO set is spam dust.

2026-02-14 15:29:54 UTC

- reply

Socially attack? Consensus on bitcoin being a monetary network sets it back before the real attack began with Taproot shenanigans. My money is on the line and I won't let "maintainers" continue to be derelict in their duty by inviting spam and destroying the price of Bitcoin.

2026-02-14 14:16:52 UTC

- reply

Because it is a juvenile proposal. Most serious monetary bitcoiners despise gambling. Our conviction does not come from "winning" someone's bitcoin, rather it comes from keeping what we have earned in a world full of economic NPCs and fiat debasement.

2026-02-13 03:43:15 UTC

- reply

Great material. Although a pruned node as "castrated" is a fairly strong position. Pruned nodes make snapshots and never have to do IBD again. The white paper included pruning for a reason and in the long, long run all nodes will eventually be pruned. Electrum servers and lightning channels are "extensions to" not "features of" bitcoin. Totally optional by providing enhancements and features such as block explorers and light client connectivity, but not a requirement.

2026-02-13 03:22:11 UTC

- reply

By "pure Bitcoiner" are you referring to monetary users? I would argue that the mempool.space clogging jpeggers with their 0.1 sat per vbyte "transactions" are making node running not fun anymore. I have my 2023 prune=550 snapshot zipped around 5 gb now about 13 gb in 2026. The UTXO bloat from all this unfun garbage is filling up my RAM and disk and I am not a "Knotzi" for choosing a peaceful separation from jpeggers. If you disagree, you are welcome to relay it, store it and promote it. As for me, I enjoy my light, suckless node.

2026-02-13 01:32:32 UTC

- reply

I ami'm confused by the phrase "economic conviction". My node is lighter to run, and costs me nothing to change clients. I relay the transactions that make sense to me, and I encourage others to do the same. If nobody follows me, then the rest of the network can have clogged mempools that need a plunger. Keep in mind, I don't even have to run a node in the first place. It's a volunteer system.

2026-02-12 12:43:53 UTC

- reply

I don't need to gamble to show my conviction. I just need to run my node.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dYA9vYa0iwQ

2026-02-11 02:26:07 UTC

- reply

The mempool of Knots with BIP-110 is much cleaner and focused than a Core node. The fractional sat relay nonsense is reason enough to unclog this toilet.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dYA9vYa0iwQ

2026-02-09 20:26:54 UTC

- reply

Love the accolades from the inscriptions folks. Lots of VC capital about to vanish into the abyss. Run Knots with BIP-110 and Rug the Spammers in 2026
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dYA9vYa0iwQ

2026-02-07 21:11:18 UTC

- reply

Time to rug the spammers.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dYA9vYa0iwQ

2026-02-06 18:47:03 UTC

- reply

Knots is winning. Bitcoin has lost half of its value since Core v30 was released in October. Time to rug the spammers. Follow this video if you want to run Knots with BIP-110
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dYA9vYa0iwQ

2026-02-06 11:42:03 UTC

- reply

Run Knots with BIP -110 and rug the spammers
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dYA9vYa0iwQ

2026-02-02 19:46:25 UTC

- reply

Run Bitcoin Knots with BIP-110 and rug the spammers in 2026
https://youtu.be/dYA9vYa0iwQ

2026-02-02 12:03:24 UTC

- reply

If you really think Bitcoin is the best money then you will run Knots with BIP-110. Nostr does data storage while Bitcoin does money.
https://youtu.be/dYA9vYa0iwQ

2026-02-02 02:53:04 UTC

- reply

Run Bitcoin Knots with BIP-110 and rug the spammers. Then we WILL have this. https://youtu.be/dYA9vYa0iwQ

2026-02-01 22:34:34 UTC

Great video on how to run Bitcoin Knots with BIP-110.
https://youtu.be/dYA9vYa0iwQ

2026-01-04 20:41:46 UTC

- reply

All it takes is one.

2026-01-01 20:12:12 UTC

- reply

Price models are all bogus. Just buy and wait.

2025-12-31 23:00:22 UTC

- reply

Happy New Year!
Run Knots and rug the spammers in 2026.

2025-12-27 12:40:21 UTC

- reply

I am confused how UTXO set makes no difference? I keep a March 2023 prune=550 snapshot on a usb for bootstrapping my node in case of data corruption or for node migration. I have a recent snapshot that is double the size. At this rate, how is this not a concern? Since Satoshi included pruning in the white paper, and is the inevitable destination for all nodes eventually, why should they be forced to carry this data forever? How is this not damaging to bitcoin's decentralization?

2025-12-25 04:41:21 UTC

- reply

Could be. The freedom may be on paper, but real freedom comes from within assuming you can earn fairly and save fairly. Bitcoin avoids capital controls (for the most part).

2025-12-24 21:07:12 UTC

- reply

Successful people do not retire or leave the States for inferior and less free places. American wealth has always been built by those courageous enough to accept the reality that you keep progressing and stacking and don't abandon ship as soon as things appear good. Never sell out, only perpetually buy in.

2025-12-24 19:50:44 UTC

- reply

You have to live somewhere and at least in the fiat first world, you have options and can buy Bitcoin. In the 3rd world there is no wealth or income for you to store.

2025-12-24 16:47:17 UTC

- reply

You can tell the audience because he starts at 18 and mentions traveling the world. As you get older you know how unimportant travel (especially the the corrupt 3rd world) is and how it detracts from more important life goals.

2025-12-23 18:36:33 UTC

- reply

Thank you for your content and sending this important message. Merry Christmas to you and your family!

2025-12-23 13:51:36 UTC

- reply

For those who are tech savvy and/or believe in exclusively using open source everything (especially for bitcoin): https://armantheparman.medium.com/how-to-set-up-a-raspberry-pi-zero-air-gapped-running-latest-version-of-electrum-desktop-wallet-85e59ecaddc0

2025-12-20 13:58:34 UTC

- reply

I am confused with the problem. Satoshi advocated for changing the encryption should the need arise. Satoshi advocated for pruning nodes in the white paper. Satoshi advocated for self sovereignty by having every holder (and probably miner) be a node. You will have to be alive to be a node. If an upgrade burns a dead man's coins it is not confiscation. If they are alive, but fall asleep at the wheel then they deserve to be locked out. What am I missing?

2025-12-17 16:50:41 UTC

- reply

It will be much more productive if individual nodes can opt-into UTXO freezing and deleting rather than a consensus change that needs approval. As a node runner, which all NPC Bitcoiners need to become, I want the freedom to modify my node as I and people like me see fit. I do not want an artificially large chainstate with 40% dust outputs clogging up my RAM and sitting idle on my disk. As far as my UTXOs, I have them saved and can send them whenever I see fit. I don't have any dust and I certainly don't have any spam. The CAT as a soft fork is likely to get FUDed out of existence and I would prefer a more self sovereign solution to the spam problem should this fall flat.

2025-12-14 18:29:31 UTC

- reply

If "The Cat" can delete the spam UTXOs then this is a game changer. Why would any node continue to store garbage forever on their computers if they don't have to? Freezing and deleting the spam dust is perfectly compatible with freedom of bitcoin. It isn't censorship and it isn't confiscation. It is choosing to no longer volunteer to have your resources exploited by shipcoiners and shit coiners. It is the obvious solution to this growing problem.

2025-12-13 15:29:14 UTC

- reply

This may be up my alley because:
1. I run Knots.
2. I combine UTXOs to reduce chainstate bloat.
3. If I can delete small spammy UTXOs from my node, then I do not have to permanently store garbage.
4. My individual sovereignty is in tact while supporting the Bitcoin network that I want and the people like me want.
Time to Make Bitcoin Fun Again.

2025-12-07 01:22:03 UTC

- reply

Although I happy to fight against spammers at all cost, this proposal sounds like a bad idea. UTXO bloat is THE number 1 issue surrounding spam precisely because small amounts of bitcoin are burned into the chain never to be spent again. All sorts of gobledeygook shows up in the witness data and the intention is for garbage data to be baked in there bloating the set.
This proposal forces it to stay burned which is the opposite direction we need to go. We need those UTXOs combined and making the set lighter.
I understand the argument is to punish spammers such that they stop and the net effect will be a reduction in overall spam, but this proposal guarantees that those UTXOs will never be combined.

2025-12-05 12:29:45 UTC

- reply

He's ugly too.

2025-12-05 02:23:32 UTC

- reply

I think some clarity is in order. Monetary transactions are the exchange of value between two parties. Gambling is not a monetary transaction which is why casinos give you chips. The value exchange is when cash is converted into playtime represented with chips, dice, cards, etc. Placing $50 on red echanges no value but converting dollars to casino shitcoin allows you the value of entertainment for a set period of time at a set place.

2025-11-26 18:38:53 UTC

- reply

Thank you Matthew for another great video. I too, was offended by his smug comments. He is objectively wrong on a lot of things and his insults expose his lack of critical thinking and that he blindly follows false idols. I don't care for his technical "expertise". He is a poser and a fraud. Multi sig is not too difficult for Bitcoiners. He may "want op_return" but there is no guarantee that shipcoiners will go that route because he wills it to be that way. I like pruned nodes, but if that is one's argument for large op_return then they are no Bitcoiner. Posers, no matter how long in the space, have no place here.

2025-11-26 11:29:04 UTC

- reply

Andreas is an apologist for Bitcoin Core and the miners and corporate backers they serve. He is as elegant on this issue as he is about multi-sig, which he claims is "too difficult" for most people. Never mistake confidence of opinion for objective correctness of opinion.

2025-11-25 01:35:09 UTC

- reply

Real vs Fake. Great angle. The problem is people have abandoned the quest for reality and are in search of a good fantasy - paraphrasing Robert J. Ringer (libertarian)

2025-11-21 03:05:10 UTC

- reply

Knots does not compete with Core, it competes with Core v. 30. Anything not v30 can be assumed skepticism of the recent large OP_RETURN change. I am confident that 1 year is enough time to onboard the conservative monetarists needed to enact change at the consensus level. Great video as always.

2025-11-19 14:48:56 UTC

- reply

It's amazing that someone who started as a shit coiner can have so much influence over the protocol. Gloria Zhao is probably not even a whole coiner.

2025-11-19 12:14:07 UTC

- reply

Excellent beginner tutorial on THE best and most important Bitcoin wallet. Great work as always.

2025-11-17 15:34:59 UTC

- reply

Is running Knots enough, or do we need a soft fork?

2025-11-09 00:45:41 UTC

- reply

Your logic is sound and solid. I think when Core apologists say that you are welcome to prune op_return they are being deliberately dismissive. Pruned nodes make up roughly 10% of nodes and are assuming that Knots enthusiasts will make up a similar proportion.
I will disagree in that I am not entirely convinced that Electrum servers are entirely necessary. I proudly and intentionally run a pruned node because:
1) Thats the only way Bitcoin will last indefinitely on minimal hardware.
2) Pruning to save space is specifically outlined in the White Paper as an essential component.
3) The purpose of transactions are to verify the UTXO set and once verified, stored in a wallet file (wallet.dat, sparrow.db, etc).
4) Downloading the entire chain after several decades is repetitive, inconvenient, unnecessary and bloats the collective bandwidth.
5) It is easy to get up and running with a snapshot (a few GBs) verifiable up to a particular point in the past keeping a decade or so of blocks on relatively cheap hardware.
6) Full archival nodes' resource inensity is causing reliance on Electrum servers inhibiting users from decentralizing the network by running fulling validating (pruned) nodes.
7) If all nodes are pruned up to a certain point, then privacy is restored as people are incentivised to secure their scanned and verified wallet files and not depend on continuous scanning of the chain.
8) Pruned nodes encourage periodically combining UTXOs to stay current and reduce bloat of the set, which is exactly the opposite of what inscriptions and dust with op_return does.
9) Privacy and security benefits from running an Electrum server to connect with one's node seems overkill when Bitcoin RPC rests on port 8332 not exposed to the public internet.
10) Although rescans are not possible, it is easier and faster to bootstrap from a verified snapshot than to scan blocks or do an initial block download when data gets corrupted.
11) Bitcoin was never designed under a client/server model. It was always assumed that nodes/miners/users are all one in the same. Electrum, although essential for bootstrapping the network of bitcoin users early on, has lead to reliance on third parties to supply transaction relay inhibiting censorship resistance and pseudonymous/private transactions.
Thank you for reading this lengthy piece. If I am completely off the mark please let me know what I am missing.

2025-11-08 20:42:16 UTC

- reply

I guess the real bet is when will v30 surpass Knots 1010, 0903, and 0305 combined?

2025-11-08 02:11:48 UTC

- reply

So glad you brought Bastiat's "Seen and Unseen" into the discussion. Great piece.

2025-11-06 02:44:56 UTC

- reply

Excellent video. I run one node. It's a real node. It's a Knots node.

2025-10-30 11:35:27 UTC

- reply

Digital land, labor, and capital. Great thesis.

2025-10-25 15:41:02 UTC

- reply

I am not a developer but not a pleb either. I only interface with the commandline using bitcoind. I have switched to Knots (extremely easy migration btw) and node runners would do better to not to use bitcoin-qt at all. Basic Linux commandline education is more valuable than UX in my opinion.

2025-10-25 01:00:42 UTC

- reply

Years ago, when people were discussing 100k bitcoin the thought was that every merchant in the world would be accepting bitcoin by then. We are north of 100k and there are not that many more vendors. Bitcoin is for property exchange not trinket sales.

2025-10-24 11:22:44 UTC

- reply

But Lyn, this YouTuber told me I should just use a lot of leverage to harness passive income and make money while I sleep with no work on my part all while paying zero taxes just like "the rich". Your advice seems to adopt a "poor person mindset". What are going to tell us next... that we shouldn't be using cash value life insurance with paid up additions to draw tax free income for life?

2025-10-20 22:03:39 UTC

- reply

Today's children will rebel against the radical wickedness of today. When all of today's popular poor decisions are reduced to bellbottoms or parachute pants, things will improve. We live in post "Friends" culture where people have big urban rent, massive student loans and no bitcoin because they are trying to be a paleontologist working at the Museum of Natural History. Today's kids will fight this downwardly mobile trend.

2025-10-19 12:13:21 UTC

- reply

When bitcoin becomes the asset of choice for the American saver we will see many wishing they could have 0.1 BTC the same way people today wished they had bought 1 BTC a few years ago.

2025-10-19 12:09:43 UTC

- reply

It is a proper and conservative stance. One that carries respect. I was running Satoshi v. 27.0/ for almost two years and it worked just fine. I now run knots but understand hesitance on switching with only one dev. I am a fan of node configurability and I believe my nodes resources should be spent on relaying legitimate transactions, not spam that happened to have a cryptographic signature.

2025-10-13 11:56:33 UTC

- reply

I think Nostr in its current state is too technical for the mainstream. There needs to be a plug and play relay box, and client software that is user friendly. Primal does a good job moving in that direction, but Nostr also needs child friendly filters for parents to curate their environment. The pornographic spam that popped into my feed a few months ago nearly caused me to completely give up on the whole concept of decentralized social media.

2025-10-12 12:27:40 UTC

- reply

No mention of bitcoin ... yet.

2025-10-11 16:10:14 UTC

- reply

Great video for carnivore. Making me hungry for more bacon.

2025-10-09 01:25:50 UTC

- reply

Absolutely. I would also add the simple premise that node operators should be able to have increased configurability of their nodes. I hear a lot of personal attacks and fear mongering, but I have not heard much about the importance of nodes to control what they relay. I think thats the core issue (no pun intended)

2025-10-06 11:07:57 UTC

- reply

P.T. Barnum said that "people like to be humbugged". The pro-wrestling arena of politics and social communication favors a majority stake in centralized platforms. 15% will exit and maybe that can grow to 25%.

2025-10-02 01:11:52 UTC

- reply

Roll back, or slide into Knots.

2025-10-02 01:06:45 UTC

- reply

I think this says more about DC than about Saylor. Trying to sell something as simple as bitcoin to a bunch of bureaucrats is going to make for cringe, off topic presentations. Hes struggling to find a serious utility other than sound money, and hes coming up empty.

2025-10-02 00:45:00 UTC

- reply

It's sad really. Years from now we will look back on this historic moment and will tell the tale of the pot smoking monkey jpeggers and how they worked to derail the monetary revolution.

2025-09-29 02:21:13 UTC

Your keys, your coins.
Your node, your rules.

2025-09-28 13:47:06 UTC

- reply

I'll also add that using bitcoin for data storage is lame ass. It's mind boggling that this is even a debate in the bitcoin space.