Thread

Knots and Core: the False War for Bitcoin’s Soul Bitcoin’s war isn’t technical but political. Core vs Knots is a staged conflict by bankers and governments to capture the network from within. I present my hypothesis. The strategy is Problem–Reaction–Solution, and they create the scenario. The shrewd bankers create a rift with insiders to generate discussion and distract from and mask the true objective. Luke Dashjr, long-time Bitcoin Core developer and creator of Bitcoin Knots, is pushing a “anti-spam” soft fork. He claims to be cleaning useless data from the chain. But the motives behind it aren’t that clean. The debate around OP_RETURN and “illegal data” is the perfect pretext: if one group decides what kind of information can circulate, it also decides who can transact. Code becomes pure politics. Knots and Core seem opposed, but they’re playing chess on the same board. One creates the problem (“the network is full of junk”), the other offers the solution (“we need to filter it”). That “spam” narrative opens a backdoor for something much bigger: control over Bitcoin’s data flow. The next logical step: on-chain identity and compliance. And that’s where BlackRock steps in. It doesn’t need to write code — it buys the board. It holds stakes in several of the largest Bitcoin mining companies in the U.S. and manages ETFs holding thousands of BTC. Controlling mining doesn’t mean censoring blocks today. It means having veto power tomorrow, once social consensus has been shaped by “legal” or “ethical” narratives. On-chain KYC won’t be imposed by decree. It’ll be legitimized as a “technical necessity” to prevent risks or “illegal data.” One soft fork at a time. The strategy is old: create the crisis, offer the cure, and hide the business inside the cure. Knots and Core act like two banks pretending to compete while coordinating the same outcome. Follow the money trail to understand the destination. Bitcoin was born to eliminate intermediaries. The control narrative gains ground because economic incentives dominate: “hodl to the moon.” Thus the same global financial system with on-chain KYC — banking v3.0 — is forged. And the new central bank treasury will be the code itself.

Replies (2)

Opening up the OP_RETURN limit introduces new legal concerns. Miners would be forced to regulate themselves more carefully and develop their own censorship rules to avoid liability. Since everything is propagated across the network, miners would still need to process spam to remain profitable, but they would also need centralized filtering mechanisms to avoid breaking the law. What‘s the bad part about the opposition?