8 channels are still marked as waiting_close. If you are one of them please force close. Channels in this state are NodeMcNodyface2000, FreeBeer, BYOBnHODL, Happy Banana, nodular, Mickey Weir.
62% recovery done on the same version as where the backup was made. I was here before using a newer version of lnd. That version thought I had zero channels to recover. I hope this will work otherwise I will post the problem on the LND issue list
I was using a raid system but swapped out a another disk and re-added it (quickly). DO NOT DO that! Just an update. I am currently re-indexing the chain. My Lightning directory does seem intact but as a test I used chantools to compact the channel db file and it failed.... If everything fails, I plan on re-starting and opening channels to all nodes that were working well a couple of days ago Was using LND 0.18.5Â
Run a v30 core node? This is what the headlines could look like Mainstream media will be ready to report this immediately. Stop it now. Run a (knots) node OR run a node with any other software besides 'core' v30 - due out Friday... Any old SSD laptop online can do this - otherwise the bitcoin network will eventually be trashed with this junk and node runners may be forced to stop their nodes indefinitely. This is a serious and vicious attack on the network. Claiming this won't/can't happen is rubbish. The headline is real and already happened to the BSV unsuccessful copy of bitcoin. There the exact same spam enabling software/code change was used. This is malware - software designed to harm. This needs to be kept far away from Bitcoin
Hi Folks - It's official Knots the implementation Edelweiss uses is #1
There is still a lot of path to be gained - others do not strictly speaking need to move but if you want to fight spam on the Bitcoin Network and prevent legal risk in running a node it is BEST TO MOVE. Remember we are bitcoiners and we are here because we moved from the current financial system to the future one.Â
This has not gone unnoticed and to prevent bitcoin being turned into a digital CENTRAL bank where the implementation that governs how it works takes over - We moved again.Â
Not sure where this is going to end. Node runners do not want child porn images on their nodes - making them theoretically illegal Core still seem intent on pushing the change through on their 30 version. Does this end in bitcoin forking?Â
duczko on X writes My current understanding of the Core/Knots debate below 👇 Let me know what you think.Â
CURRENT STATE
1. All nodes are blocking the data so <100kb images can’t get stuffed into the chain in easy readable form.
2. Slipstream and MARA wont accept to put illicit images on-chain via their backdoors because it’s a massive business risk for them (and the team would have moral objections too).
3. People that want to put illicit images >80 bytes on-chain are left with the only option to chop up the data in hard to read form. Thereby giving the noderunner plausible deniability and relative safety from government crackdown.
4. As a result the chain is mostly clean from easy readable large 100kb-ish images with illicit content. Yes, there is nasty stuff hidden in convoluted forms, but you have to have special software and know where it is to find it. Thereby, hosting the blockchain is not tied with legal risk.
NO FILTER STATE
1. Anyone can put large illicit images >80 bytes into your node. Because you are downloading and decrypting the data in easy readable form by the node software you don’t have plausible deniability and you are exposed to significant personal legal risk.
2. Also, the chain will start getting stuffed with illicit images that everyone will have to store. Which may also become a big problem for node runners down the road, making hosting Bitcoin blockckain into a toxic waste storage operation that many noderunners may opt out of.
SUMMARY
Core is playing with fire. Changing from current state into a filterless state is not a trivial change as many claim but is connected with significant risk to destroy incentives for noderunners to run nodes. Risking significant decrease in people wanting to run nodes and thereby decreasing Bitcoin decentralization.
NOTE
An argument I often hear is “only economic node matter”. I’m not sure I agree, but let’s assume it’s true. Then it’s still true that the people running economic nodes have personal risk and if it’s a business then it’s also a team and a business risk that many economic noderunners may not be eager to take.
The total number of Knots nodes is constantly increasing, but - Core node count is ALSO increasing in step with Knots This can only mean that the fight on the bitcoin front has moved to the node system! The people behind the core spam enabling who are anti decentralization are fighting Knots!
Remain vigilant and run Knots
Lightning nodes can run Knots and should I have updated and even notice performance improvements...
Fact is: Everyone who can run a bitcoin node SHOULD BE RUNNING ONE If you understand Bitcoin Defend the Network It IS your responsibility No Node decentralization No Freedom Ergo: Run KNOTS
'Then they fight you' Read on X from @Dennis_Porter_ and in the replies
In case you didn't notice folks There is a war going on outside A financial war And it's being fought digitally Think Kodak trying to kill off digital cameras #RunKnots
This is a serious fight. Nodes should not be storing/broadcasting spam Move to Knots - Your node will be faster and store less trash
Luke Dashjr @LukeDashjr on X weighs in on why Core's ideas will lead to more spam less decentralization in the network. Nodes / Node runners are important and need to run software which combats spam to keep data bandwidth low and cheap see below.
My node runs Knots...
'The goals of transaction relay listed are basically all wrong. Predicting what will be mined is a centralizing goal. Expecting spam to be mined is defeatism. Helping spam propagate is harmful. This OPED contradicts itself, presenting out of band relay as both negative and also "an important aspect of Bitcoin’s censorship resistance" It ignores the lack of consent to spam by users/node operators, giving deference to the attackers and the malicious miners who might conspire with them. It paints spam as "largely harmless", when the truth is the exact opposite. It treats abuse of the blockchain and nodes as legitimate "use cases" rather than the DoS attacks they actually are, and speaks of DoS attacks as if they were something distinct, thus implying spam isn't the same (which it is). The OPED presents itself as aligned with "Bitcoin’s long-term health" which is objectively false, and "miners’ rational self-interest" which is also at least debatably false.'
