Emergency Bitcoin Soft Fork

You are telling people to upgrade their nodes with a soft fork so new bitcoin rules you haven't even seen the code of! No peer review no nothing! You are the definition of an attack!

don't know why they are so hell bent on corrupting the chain. if you really need monkey jpegs, just do it on an L2/3. then you can trade monkey jpegs at lightning speed.

It’s not an emergency. Calling it such is a disservice to the actual problem(s).

Of course, it's an emergency. A large CSAM op return could get mined at anytime now

Following BIP99's definitions, it looks like bip444 (if deployed) would be a controversial fork and result in two chains indeed. Although I advise against running core v30, I don't support this proposal.

What do you propose doing when a block containing a large op return CSAM gets mined in the coming days or weeks?

@timoncc Not cry about it like a little baby. Be a Bitcoiner and recall that I have a copy of a ledger in a permissionless network. I don't actually have the blockchain in my house. I would recall that over 920kblocks have been mined just fine and many billions will, with or w/o you.

@timoncc Sorry, the adults in the room are having a conversation. You're clearly not a serious person

Lied in the title to claim it's a soft fork, but this would objectively be a hard fork. Also hypocritical as he clowned on Ethereum for rolling back transactions and being centralised, meanwhile he is promoting the exact same thing here. You have lost all credibility.

First reorg for CSAM, then reorg for terrorism, then reorg for money laundering...

Nope-- one is an actual illegal file. The others are just records of monetary transactions. See the difference?

@PlatinumThundr what is 'illegal'? what is 'monetary'? the only filter should be fees and the data limit can be reduced

@PlatinumThundr You can play the game of linguistic nihilism, but everyone knows that CSAM is highly illegal and morally abhorrent. Which data limit-- size of transaction outputs or op return in general?

preventing csam in the form of images does not prevent csam in plain text form, like dark web links leading to massive databases. which can be argued as much worse. an arbitrary line would be drawn when action is taken on something illegal/immoral. the 'slippery slope' argument applies. if we want to protect minors, do we also prevent anything 18+ such as porn from being mined? data can always be abused. there are many things highly illegal globally. the question is if that should lead to censorship, if we want to adhere to centralised authority. the debate should strictly be about wether arbitrary data is permitted on the chain. if no arbitrary data, then it should be made as small as technically feasible and possible. if yes, then it can be as big as technically possible. the debate should be defining the protocol, not policing contents. to me that would be a dangerous precedent. Kyle Stout explained it pretty well:

@mattkratter Good take-- no arbitrary data, shouldn't have to discriminate

"If a large CSAM op return block gets buried many blocks deep-- Bitcoin is actually screwed as a project." I can't imagine a more limp-wristed, fearful, boot-licker take on money perfected. Bitcoin doesn't care and bitcoin isn't about snowflakes like you.

If that's all it takes to screw this project, it was never going to succeed. Also, if you think you are just going to reorg the timechain after a new CSAM op return block is mined, you are truly clueless about how bitcoin works. Zero percent chance of that.

Thank you so much for keeping me updated on this topic.

A hard fork is coming whether we wish it or not The only choice is who does it first If we fork now, we change the rules and force attackers to fork off If we wait, they embed the payload and we’re forced to fork in reaction; under legal, political, and narrative pressure.

Great video Matt, I'm totally prepared, this is actually necessary for Bitcoin, hopefully it get implemented soon and without to much problems

One may call it a contentious soft fork But if it rejects blocks that Core v30 nodes already accept, then it’s not just soft. It breaks consensus That’s a hard fork, by effect if not by name We don’t get to redefine forks mid-crisis just to make the optics cleaner

It's a soft fork because it narrows the rules and is backwards compatible

There is no choice in this matter. Fork.

Emergency Bitcoin Soft Fork Run Knots

As per Grok: 1) For BCASH: No instances of on-chain CSAM were found. 2) For BSV: Yes, there were documented instances of CSAM, but no arrests were reported. Are you at least verifying the info you recount as ‘facts’ in your videos?

“Peter Thiel’s good friend supports a hard fork that will save Bitcoin?? Sign me up.”

I asked you last summer what's you're gonna do if knots propose a fork, because it's ridiculously retarded. I mean, what are you gonna achieve other than creating a chain-split and forking yourself out ? Next, you'll cry and say that you have the REAL Bitcoin, à la Roger Ver ?

So much for censorship resistance. Isn’t there already bad content on the blockchain? Should we also shut down the internet as there’s bad content on there too? It looks like you’re highlighting a problem to publicly harm the reputation of Bitcoin.

Set the data carrier limit to 42 or 83 bytes?

again, Thanks so so much for this...

I'm positive to the bip444, or some variant. A one-year reduction of non-economic data seems like a reasonable course. I don't view the situation as a crisis but believe that bip444 is the correct path to keep bitcoin's integrity and ensure that nodes will not be legally costly.

Is going to be contentious, Knots will fork off and Core keeps control of repo. This solves nothing, and empowers the opposition. Bad strategic move, and sad considering they were gaining support and momentum.

The kill shot is already here It went under the rug due to its technical nature, a lack of adversarial anticipation in the community and the obvious corruption of Core Now is not the time to play existential Twister to preserve optics

Is the op-return war having an impact on price? Do you know long term holders that are selling because of v30?

Yes, I've heard from lots of them in my YT comment section saying they are selling off some BTC. Today's move probably has more to do with the Fed

Mat you don’t realize it but Luke is fukn nuts! And this is a censoring behavior Csam will not come and it will be priced out. Drop the nonsense you are hurting our community

You can attack the argument without ad hominems. There's no magical law of the universe that ensures that monetary transactions are predestined to price out data storage:

@ungovbitcoin

A reorg is actually not for the longest chain, but the chain with the most hash. That doesn't necessarily mean it has to be the longest chain

If the competition between the chains continues for a while and the non-spam chain weakens, should this chain not be maintained nevertheless as long as some relevant miners are still participating, resulting in 2 chains? Should Knots need any preparation for this case?

This is only censorship. Try to stop the crime not the datas.

Let me get this right you’re saying CORE devs are releasing a 30.1.2 version with the closed CSAM / CP option removed? Knots also??? Thanks for sharing your time with us! d0xC