Bitcoin has operated under the rules proposed by BIP-110 for 14 years. Don’t let anyone try to convince you that it’s a new change. This is reverting back to how things used to be, before a few Bitcoin Core “devs” rammed through some iatrogenic changes.

Opponents of BIP-110 had months to build a substantive URSF. Instead, all we got was noise, complaints, and threats to fork off.

We’re now weeks from mandatory signaling at block 961632. If 55% of miners signal, BIP-110 locks in early. If not, enforcing…

Samson, last fall you told two podcasts (clips attached) that Core had

- "a lot of structural problems with the organization itself"
- developers with "ulterior motives" doing "conflicted" things
- a "laundry list": "backstabbing, internal politics, brigading…

What @LukeDashjr is warning us of is a Ledger Poisoning Attack zero day and the real possibility an attacker uses CSAM to create a “radioactive ledger”. Do we give the attacker an approved lane, pretend it doesn’t exist, or patch it before it becomes a problem?…

The U.S. Bitcoin industrial complex very active and focused on this BIP-110.

Why? Because they are pursuing regulatory capture while simultaneously seeking control of the network through more subtle, subversive means.

BIP-110 is a response to that strategy.…

Michael Saylor Speaking Ex Cathedra (BIP-110)

Imagine aligning with these rats against people like Knut Svanholm, Jeff Booth, George Bodine and Nick Szabo.

Template construction is well on the way to becoming decentralized.

BIP110 is required for this to have any significance.

Miner-side template construction is irrelevant if we're centralized at the node level.

The influencers blew a perfect opportunity with BIP-110.

Instead they took their marching orders from the Core™ industrial complex and will be ousted by principled monetary maximalists when Bitcoin returns to its sole purpose as permissionless money.

Good…

⚠️ You have two choices.

1.) BIP-110

2.) The United States Bitcoin industrial complex