Post Az8sEEcLNaVPz0egMa by 32e1827635450ebb3c5a7d12c1f8e7b2b514439ac10a67eef3d9fd9c5c68e245@mostr.pub
(DIR) More posts by 32e1827635450ebb3c5a7d12c1f8e7b2b514439ac10a67eef3d9fd9c5c68e245@mostr.pub
(DIR) Post #Az8sEEcLNaVPz0egMa by 32e1827635450ebb3c5a7d12c1f8e7b2b514439ac10a67eef3d9fd9c5c68e245@mostr.pub
2025-09-29T13:02:12.000Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
did you know you can get the bitcoin whitepaper from your pruned node? Its stored in the utxoset permanently. Heres a one liner i created to extract itseq 0 947 | (while read -r n; do bitcoin-cli gettxout 54e48e5f5c656b26c3bca14a8c95aa583d07ebe84dde3b7dd4a78f4e4186e713 $n | jq -r '.scriptPubKey.asm' | awk '{ print $2 $3 $4 }'; done) | tr -d '\n' | cut -c 17-368600 | xxd -r -p > bitcoin.pdfThis is why we prefer people use large OP_RETURNs instead of 947 outputs that can’t be pruned. OP_RETURNs are probably unspendable so they will never end up in your pruned nodes utxoset.They also produce smaller blocks than inscriptions. Unfortunately they are 4x more expensive… but lifting the filter restriction is one small thing we can do to encourage it over other options that are much worse for bitcoin spam-wise.You definitely don’t want illegal, unprunable stuff in your utxoset permanently, which is why i am running core v30 to do what i can to disincentivize this spam.
(DIR) Post #Az8sEG0qBzhAJH7lBY by 991e7f81604edd7cf459ceeec346dcdc18f08d9c13afbc039e29b915993771c9@mostr.pub
2025-09-30T03:14:21.000Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
If everyone is using only pruned nodes, new nodes won't be able to download the blockchain, bitcoin will die
(DIR) Post #Az8sOUY50CzkHxYG12 by jeffcliff@shitposter.world
2025-10-12T19:08:07.272073Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@32e1827635450ebb3c5a7d12c1f8e7b2b514439ac10a67eef3d9fd9c5c68e245 what is your 'jq' script
(DIR) Post #Az8sS3j2fk4uFxNdHk by 90eb20364eea23c320b750476b36772b5348bf2960d0d6ba941239a576ca3150@mostr.pub
2025-09-29T14:13:18.000Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
Or you could patch CVE-2023-50428 into core and disincentive it a lot more than “asking” spammers to pay more money.
(DIR) Post #Az8sS4v8EHLJxk2nlg by 16f1a0100d4cfffbcc4230e8e0e4290cc5849c1adc64d6653fda07c031b1074b@mostr.pub
2025-09-29T14:17:08.000Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
Show me the PR that can patch this "bug"
(DIR) Post #Az8sSKETIej3S4CxUm by 90eb20364eea23c320b750476b36772b5348bf2960d0d6ba941239a576ca3150@mostr.pub
2025-09-29T14:22:28.000Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
I believe it was this one:https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28408
(DIR) Post #Az8sSLErYgdIZZOmkC by jeffcliff@shitposter.world
2025-10-12T19:08:48.401984Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@90eb20364eea23c320b750476b36772b5348bf2960d0d6ba941239a576ca3150 @16f1a0100d4cfffbcc4230e8e0e4290cc5849c1adc64d6653fda07c031b1074b @32e1827635450ebb3c5a7d12c1f8e7b2b514439ac10a67eef3d9fd9c5c68e245 stop using github!
(DIR) Post #Az8sVFW7HvO3hCr6cy by 61bf790b2094afb03495c9e136acf615be0fccc2cb95b5acfb5f6ccefe18b062@mostr.pub
2025-09-29T13:06:04.000Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
But if I prune my node it won’t serve IBD to the network.
(DIR) Post #Az8sVGVnaaj8mViMls by 32e1827635450ebb3c5a7d12c1f8e7b2b514439ac10a67eef3d9fd9c5c68e245@mostr.pub
2025-09-29T13:07:07.000Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
not all nodes need to be full archival nodes. that would be bad for decentralization.
(DIR) Post #Az8sVHRw6REPgounOC by 74dc785720571d6bb584e67cadbdd4e4449b91dce5ab31f266ca22eee0b43ccb@mostr.pub
2025-09-29T13:40:07.000Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
Man.. you've lost the plot, honestly. Alright, Will, I'll definitely respect your argumentation. Keep going at it for sure. Its the way things should be. My only wish/advice is, you also take an honest look at the reaction from node runners and take that into account as you support a change on core. If you ask me, looking at the reaction from an HONEST point of view, it tells me a substantial amount noderunners disagree with whatever logic you and core devs are presenting. And despite whatever you might think, "a substantial amount of noderunners" disagreeing on a changr should raise serious concerns about that change.
(DIR) Post #Az8sYj7RgVzoNEySA4 by ec99edc5567e02815fb15020285e2fa8390931cedf59c83d6bb2c5f6ee1530b9@mostr.pub
2025-09-29T13:18:27.000Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
More full nodes is now "bad for decentralization" ...?
(DIR) Post #Az8seFmNgLx17EkyRs by 32e1827635450ebb3c5a7d12c1f8e7b2b514439ac10a67eef3d9fd9c5c68e245@mostr.pub
2025-09-29T13:44:27.000Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
how have i lost the plot exactly. Most people disagreeing with me don’t seem to understand the technical nuance of the spam issues at play.I believe utxospam is much worse than op_return spam, so i am acting accordingly. If “pleb” noderunners disagree then so be it. They can continue living in an alternate reality that doesn’t affect me.
(DIR) Post #Az8seHAsUl8lRVE3Gq by 74dc785720571d6bb584e67cadbdd4e4449b91dce5ab31f266ca22eee0b43ccb@mostr.pub
2025-09-29T13:58:01.000Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
The "lost the plot" part was directed at the note I replied to. Obviously all nodes being full nodes is not bad for decentralization. I think/hope your rationale is -- if all nodes HAVE to be full nodes --> there would be fewer full nodes --> which would be bad for decentralisation. But your phrasing is easily misinterpreted to something that sounds like people should prefer to run pruned nodes. Thats the way I read it the first time. My point with respecting the signal from a substantial amount of noderunners is, since the problem the proposed change seeks to fix and the response is as controversial as it is, no change should be implemented. A better fix should be given time to be thought of.
(DIR) Post #Az8seHlOJ0LbGkJDBQ by 32e1827635450ebb3c5a7d12c1f8e7b2b514439ac10a67eef3d9fd9c5c68e245@mostr.pub
2025-09-29T13:59:54.000Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
pruned nodes are full nodes
(DIR) Post #Az8seIO1zLFvCaO4PY by 74dc785720571d6bb584e67cadbdd4e4449b91dce5ab31f266ca22eee0b43ccb@mostr.pub
2025-09-30T07:41:05.000Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
You get to decide your own semantics, but for yourself only. I'd argue its silly to think pruned node = full node and full node != full archival node. Why have a mode called pruned then!Obviously full node = full archival node and PRUNED NODE IS PRUNED and cannot serve IBD.
(DIR) Post #Az8seJGGjgdnunlNx2 by 32e1827635450ebb3c5a7d12c1f8e7b2b514439ac10a67eef3d9fd9c5c68e245@mostr.pub
2025-09-30T07:55:06.000Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
full means fully validating. Its not “me deciding my own semantics “. Its literally what it means
(DIR) Post #Az8siD3BlnyDoJVMA4 by e83b66a8ed2d37c07d1abea6e1b000a15549c69508fa4c5875556d52b0526c2b@mostr.pub
2025-09-29T13:50:03.000Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
Also Doom 😂
(DIR) Post #Az8siEToSIrSFAy8Ia by e83b66a8ed2d37c07d1abea6e1b000a15549c69508fa4c5875556d52b0526c2b@mostr.pub
2025-09-29T14:12:59.000Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
https://blockworks.co/news/play-doom-bitcoin
(DIR) Post #Az90GnyRh9xbqrjIps by 16f1a0100d4cfffbcc4230e8e0e4290cc5849c1adc64d6653fda07c031b1074b@mostr.pub
2025-10-12T20:32:36.000Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
Y? I used to self host my own gittea instance but it just doesn't make a lot of sense. My code is all local already. The only reason for a remote server is collaboration. Running my own I expect other people to create an account to contribute to my code. There's already a huge user base on GitHub.