<oembed><type>rich</type><version>1.0</version><title>brightmindsco wrote</title><author_name>brightmindsco (npub124…6ys0r)</author_name><author_url>https://nostr.now/npub1249tdlkkwkv966uek7dd0duyl7x2ffdsyaugztsedrhwp3ktcflq66ys0r</author_url><provider_name>njump</provider_name><provider_url>https://nostr.now</provider_url><html>With all due respect, the analysis that this “proves” all of these things is quite a strong claim. &#xA;&#xA;It is, at least, equally as possible that BIP-110 was simply not a good enough of an idea for most of the network to want to adopt it. &#xA;&#xA;Just because BIP-110 didn’t pass, doesn’t mean that somehow that Bitcoin is too centralized. It could also just be a humility test that a better idea is needed. &#xA;&#xA;There are so many better ideas to solve these issues than BIP-110. Such as removing the witness discount. </html></oembed>