Unchained Bitcoin Core vs Knots: Why Developers Are Fighting Over a Coming Change - Ep. 918
28 snips
Oct 7, 2025 
In this lively discussion, Adam Back, CEO of Blockstream and a Bitcoin pioneer, teams up with Chris Guida, a savvy Bitcoin and Lightning developer. They dive into the heated debate around Bitcoin's future—is it about payments or something broader? Adam argues for lifting limits on op_return to combat 'spam,' while Chris warns this may worsen the problem. Their chat also covers crucial historical lessons, the potential impact on miners' revenue, and whether the network could face splits. It's a must-listen for Bitcoin enthusiasts!
AI Snips
Chapters
Transcript
Episode notes
Core Vs Knots: The Real Fault Line
- The Core vs Knots debate centers on balancing spam control and censorship concerns in Bitcoin's policy rules.
- Both sides agree spam exists but differ on whether filtering or accommodation best preserves Bitcoin's payment function.
OpReturn Was Built As Damage Control
- OpReturn was created to offer a less harmful place for arbitrary app data than fake pubkeys that bloat UTXO.
- Core argues increasing op_return size would reduce worse hidden-data encodings and lower overall node impact.
Spam Threats Target Payments And UTXO Health
- Knots defines spam as storing non-payment data that competes with Bitcoin's payments use case.
- They warn that unregulated data protocols can cause UTXO-set bloat and higher fees that hurt payments.