I'm a supporter of BIP-110, aka RDTS. It's set to be activated in August 2026. I run a full Bitcoin node, love learning from fellow Bitcoiners, and I’m all about that healthy lifestyle. Just a straight guy here, focusing on Bitcoin's security and economics.
Discussion about BIP-110 and its implications
21 replies 360 views
calmoracleNewbie
Posts: 35 · Reputation: 38
#2Jan 14, 2018, 03:47 AM
Honestly, this BIP-110 talk is just spam. I've seen way too many unnecessary threads. If you're really into Bitcoin's health, you'd know BIP-110 is totally unneeded. Let's keep the chatter relevant.
I’m against BIP-110, like, big time. I also run a node, stack sats, and I’m fueled by caffeine and beef. No need for a Tinder bio here, just saying BIP-110 is a dumb idea.
wallet_vaultFull Member
Posts: 133 · Reputation: 431
#4Jan 14, 2018, 10:02 AM
Couldn't agree more. And hey, don’t forget your other thread about spotting no-coiners. Anyone with real BTC wouldn’t back this BIP-110 nonsense. Those with only a tiny fraction signaling support are irrelevant.
What does sexuality have to do with BIP-110 support? Seems like a weird angle to take. Just saying.
wallet_vaultFull Member
Posts: 133 · Reputation: 431
#6Jan 15, 2018, 07:43 AM
Right? It’s like they’re hiding something about their past. Makes you wonder if they’re connected to the adult film industry... just a thought.
They’re definitely drawing more attention to silly stuff like ‘dick butt jpegs’ on the blockchain. It’s hilarious.
Wait, is there actually a ‘dick butt jpeg’ in a transaction? I don’t look for that stuff on the blockchain, but it sounds wild.
wallet_vaultFull Member
Posts: 133 · Reputation: 431
#9Jan 15, 2018, 04:40 PM
If there’s not, let’s drop one in before 110 activates. That way, they’ll always have to keep a copy of it. But I doubt they’d want it anyway.
I’m not looking to verify that, but I’ve heard there’s some sketchy content out there. Plus, I’ve found actual malware signatures on the blockchain.
Yep, that’s true. There’s a transaction where malware was deployed across the Bitcoin network. Kind of scary how malicious actors can exploit it.
Exactly, that’s the danger. Peter Todd was behind that malware incident. Crazy how deep it goes.
Why do we need so many topics about BIP-110? Feels like everything has been said already. Just repeat, repeat, repeat.
atlas_minerNewbie
Posts: 48 · Reputation: 19
#14Jan 16, 2018, 09:59 AM
Maybe they realize it’s a big deal? That’s why they keep starting new threads to discuss it.
How many of your non-110 coins are you willing to trade for my 110 coins? I’m down for a fair deal.
Nah, I don’t want a version of Bitcoin that’s crippled by BIP-110. Seems like we’re on totally opposite ends.
That’s not how it works. All coins will stay fungible. This isn’t gonna create a separate version of Bitcoin or anything.
But what if it doesn’t get majority hash support? That could totally split the chain, right?
No, there won’t be a split just because BIP-110 is introduced. Blocks still get rejected if they’re invalid.
Here’s the kicker: your BIP-110 node will reject valid Bitcoin transactions it calls ‘spam’. So if miners stick to non-BIP-110 rules, good luck staying on the main chain.