⚠️Bitcoin Core defenders frame the OP_RETURN debate as overblown and irrelevant. They say Knots is poorly maintained and that all of this is just noise over a technical detail. But what they’re dismissing as noise is resistance to a dangerous shift in protocol culture. 🧵👇
The protocol is quietly being reshaped by developers aligned with VC-backed projects, while dissent is censored and filters are stripped away to make room for their payloads. But the pushback is coordinated now and announcements are coming that will make that clear.
Despite what they tell you, Knots is not a fringe codebase. It's 99.9% Core. The difference lies in its policy defaults, not its architecture. The real problem for Core defenders is that Knots prioritizes Bitcoin as money, and that makes it dangerous to those who don’t (them).
Core’s insistence that filters are ineffective ignores what is actually happening. In reality, Knots adoption has surged from 1% to over 8% of the public network. That’s a vote of no confidence in the way Core has mishandled this debacle.
Core defenders say filtering is pointless since spam can reach miners directly. That’s like saying locks are useless because doors can be kicked in. Most attackers still rely on mempool; the few who don’t, need access and privilege. Filters raise friction & that defends Bitcoin.
Core defenders say filtering is pointless since spam can reach miners directly. That’s like saying locks are useless because doors can be kicked in. Most attackers still rely on mempool; the few who don’t, need access and privilege. Filters raise friction & that defends Bitcoin.
Filters don’t stop all spam but they make it more costly, more inconsistent and less appealing. That’s why Citrea, Bitlayer, Alpen Labs, etc. are desperate to get rid of them. They want the cheapest, most consistent data path onto L1 so they can build parasitic sidechains. 💩
This isn’t just about technical direction, it's about whose interests Bitcoin Core serves. When Core developers are funded by the same VCs backing these L1 data-dependents and those same developers push protocol changes that benefit those projects, we notice.
Follow the money: Brink funds developers. Brink is backed by exchanges and rent-seeking parasites who benefit from “Bitcoin as platform.” Many of the projects pushing OP_RETURN expansion are financially tied to the same entities bankrolling Core development.
https://x.com/Leishman/status/1921746985129799933
During this debate, critics were silenced on GitHub. Threads were locked. ACKs were inserted and quietly removed. Core didn’t win consensus, they manufactured it. The technical conversation was buried under social control, then called “resolved.”
The divergence between policy and consensus has never been a flaw, it's always enabled node operators to decide how they run their infrastructure. It gives the network resilience. Core is now calling that resilience a problem and they are proposing to eliminate it.
The plan removes the OP_RETURN limit and makes the change non-user-configurable. This strips node operators of choice, forces relay of unwanted data and shifts control over transaction propagation away from users and toward centralized defaults.
The projects pushing this are not small. Citrea needs 144 bytes per transaction just to operate fraud proofs. Alpen Labs and Bitlayer need consistent L1 access for their execution layers. All of this is data-hungry infrastructure being built for speculation, not for sound money.
Bitcoin is suffering a deliberate protocol shift in plain sight. Core’s culture has been compromised by people who see Bitcoin as a general-purpose settlement platform not a monetary network. They are reshaping mempool policy to normalize that shift & silence anyone who resists.
This PR is part of a broader direction. The same people who pushed "ordinals theory" bs are laying the groundwork to push even more junk into Bitcoin, aligning protocol policy with the interests of VC-backed projects that depend on bloating the base layer.
Knots is gaining traction because it gives users a tool to enforce node-level policy that protects Bitcoin’s monetary role. It lets users reject unwanted junk transactions and assert control over what their node relays, without waiting for permission from Core.
The economic majority is forming and the foundation is being laid through node defaults that shape incentives. Mempool policy defines where users draw the line. The fight will determine whether Bitcoin remains usable as money.
A real organization is forming behind the scenes. Tools are being built, coordination is underway and an announcement is coming soon about a serious defense of Bitcoin’s monetary purpose.
https://x.com/Excellion/status/1921037295131525615
Until then, upgrade to Bitcoin Knots (takes minutes), reject Core’s capture and hold the line with those defending Bitcoin as money. Your node, your policy, and your choices matter more than ever. This will be the beginning of a counteroffensive. ✊
They have utter contempt for you. The other day it was “Bitcoiners are such trash” (Shinobi) now fLopp.eth 👇🏻
https://twitter.com/lopp/status/1921621062413955405
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
