Well, here’s something you don’t see every day. Cøbra, a name pretty much synonymous with Bitcoin’s early web infrastructure, is sounding the alarm. The long-time maintainer of Bitcoin.org is suggesting that Bitcoin Knots—a sort of dissident version of the standard software—might actually have a shot at replacing Bitcoin Core as the network’s go-to reference client for running nodes.
It’s a pretty stark warning, especially coming from someone who’s been so deeply involved for so long. And it all seems to stem from this ongoing, and maybe escalating, argument about how much arbitrary data the blockchain should carry.
A Dispute Over Data Storage
Earlier this year, the main developers working on Bitcoin Core decided on a change. They’re planning to adjust something called OP_RETURN, a tool often used for stuffing data into the blockchain. The change is scheduled for late 2025 with the release of version 30.
If nodes upgrade, the new default settings would accept and relay a lot more of this non-financial data. The Core team’s view is that this modernizes things, harmonizing how data is handled across the network.
But the Knots team sees it differently. They think nodes should filter out most of that extra data by default. Their argument is that Bitcoin’s blockspace is valuable and should be reserved primarily for its intended purpose: moving bitcoin.
The Meaning of a “Reference Client”
Bitcoin Core has been the reference client for over a decade. That term is important. It’s not just popular software; it’s supposed to be the neutral, canonical model. The gold standard for correctness and security that other versions are measured against.
It’s not about flashy features. It’s about clarity and getting the rules right. But that status isn’t a given forever. It’s earned.
Tensions between the Core and Knots camps aren’t cooling off. A recent, pretty emotional online spat between two prominent figures—PortlandHodl and BitcoinMechanic—just made things more heated. A recorded hypothetical about attacking Knots nodes went viral, an apology was mostly declined, and here we are. The two sides seem to be digging in.
And the numbers are shifting, too. Network monitors count over 4,100 Knots nodes now. That’s a tenfold increase this year. They’re still far behind Core’s roughly 19,500 nodes, but the trend is hard to ignore.
Is Core’s Position Guaranteed?
Cøbra seems to think not. One of their main concerns is Core’s apparent inability, in their view, “to effectively communicate with its users.”
They laid it out pretty clearly: if Core keeps losing users, at some point Knots could just become the default choice for people running a full node. “Nothing set in stone that says Core forever is the reference,” they noted.
They also made a point to clarify that Knots isn’t forking the blockchain itself. It’s just competitive software for node operators.
Perhaps more importantly, Cøbra suggested that developers who have gotten frustrated or burned out working on Core might find a new home contributing to Knots. That could significantly change the development landscape.
This whole drama might have a silver lining, in Cøbra’s opinion. It’s taught users a lesson about the word “consensus.” When the Core team uses it, they mean consensus among their code contributors—not necessarily among the wider community of users.
And the way users
