Knots, led by Luke Dashjr, reaches almost 9% of the total nodes with 1,953 operators.
Criticism of Knots: Unilateral Development and Without Review, according to Jack DORSEY.
In the Bitcoin ecosystem (BTC), a recent debate has captured the attention of developers, operators of nodes and users: one the changes proposed in Bitcoin Core, the most used software customer to interact with the network, and the elimination of the limit in Op_return, a function that allows to embed data in Bitcoin.
This conflict, technical in the first instance, has resulted in more philosophical positions than practices among the collaborators of the protocol. As a result, and as cryptootics reported, many nodes began to migrate to Bitcoin Knots, an alternative client, at the expense of the use of Core.
At the time of this article, of a total of 22,064 active nodes in Bitcoin, 1.953 use Knots, while Core currently maintains 20,062 nodes, although these decrease since the end of February 2025, according to Coindance. This means that Knots represents almost 9% of the totalan unpublished percentage that reflects a recent and growing adoption of this client.
Those data They can be observed in the following graph (gray line, total nodes; yellow line in fall, core nodes; rising green line, Knots nodes):
What is Bitcoin Knots and what characteristics do you have?
Bitcoin Knots is a software created and managed mainly by Luke Dashjr, a developer recognized in the ecosystem and co -founder of the Ocean Mining Pool, an initiative focused on BTC decentralized mining. Dashjr has been one of the most critical voices against the proposed changes in Bitcoin Core, arguing that they could compromise the efficiency and decentralization of the network.
Knots is a Fork Bitcoin Core, which means that Take the Core base code and modifies it to include additional features. Although it shares most of its code with Bitcoin Core, Knots introduces specific adjustments that, according to their defenders, better protect the principles of decentralization and network efficiency. In his repository of GITHUBthree configurations are highlighted that differentiate it:
First, Knots limits the size of the data that can be embedded in the network by op_return to 42 bytes. OP_RETURN is type of transaction that allows you to store information in the Bitcoin file, such as metadata, images, text, but if you abuse it, you can increase storage requirements, potentially affecting the performance of the nodes. This limit seeks prevent excessive use Bitcoin for non -monetary data.
Second, Knots Activate by default the option of “reject parasites”which filters transactions considered low value for the network (spam), such as those that would consume resources without providing significant benefits. This would help maintain the mempool (the set of transactions pending confirmation) cleaner and efficient.
Finally, Knots offers the possibility of re -related tokens transactions, although this option is deactivated by default.
And Bitcoin Core?
Bitcoin Core, on the other hand, of open source (Knots inherits that quality too), is the Bitcoin reference client, used by most of the nodes to keep the network in operation and is developed by a community of regular collaborators, with thousands of historical contributionsand their updates are published in bitcoincore.org After a review process.
Bitcoin Core It allows a broader limit in the op_return field (80 bytes) than Knots. For example, if a CORE operator intended that your node only accept transactions that include up to 42 bytes of data, as Bitcoin Knots does by default, you must specify that client configuration.
Although it has no specific functions to reject low value or tokens related transactions, as it occurs in Bitcoin Knots, in Core it is possible to adjust rates and forwarding policies to reduce its impact.
Thus, it could be concluded that Core does not offer such granular or specific control, which reflects its more generalist and less restrictive approach compared to Knots (which does not make one better or worse than the other).
Opinions about this debate in the Bitcoiner community
The core of the conflict lies in the changes proposed in Bitcoin Core, specifically the relaxation of the Op_return limit, which some developers see as a risk to decentralization.
In X, the researcher and developer known as Callebtc express His position in favor of Bitcoin Core: «Now it is a good time to show support for Bitcoin Core. Not because Knots can achieve something (it cannot, it has been discussed infinitely), but because people are confused, angry and They are being manipulated by their influencers to believe that the team behind Core is not reliable ».
However, Callebtc responses reflect the diversity of opinions in the ecosystem. A user replied In that thread of X: «I am not against innovation, but swelling the chain with arbitrary data through relaxed boundaries of Op_return goes directly against the Bitcoin mission. Bitcoin was designed as moneyNot like a canvas for jpegs or embedded garbage. Maintaining the light chain is what protects nodes, decentralization and long -term resilience. Knots does not try to ‘achieve’ nothing spectacular. It is about keeping things tight, predictable and aligned with the original spirit: global consensus through simplicity ».
Another person added A more pragmatic approach: «Core is developed by people, and people are corruptible. The best way to combat corruption is through competition in the free market. That’s why, support that there are more customers competing with each other. That the nodes operators decide who they trust ».
A third comment deepened in the distrust of some towards Bitcoin Core: «They want to take autonomy from nodes operators and impose their own policy. It is no surprise that there is so much lack of trust.
Given this, Callebtc offered An interesting answer: «’its own policy’? There is dozen different policy rulesyou are just focusing on one of them and you have been blindly accepting all the others for years ».
The position of Jack DORSEY and the criticism of Knots
The debate has also been addressed by influential figures such as Jack Dorsy, an investor in Ocean and Development Finance of Bitcoin Core. DORSEY reacted A claims from Luke Dashjr about Bitcoin Knots, denialing several ideas that have circulated: «I have been seeing some statements that ‘Bitcoin Knots is part of the Bitcoin Core project’, which ‘Bitcoin Knots is just another version of Bitcoin Core’ and that ‘Bitcoin Knots has more contributors than Bitcoin Core’,” he wrote in X.
Dorsy said Bitcoin Core has a solid development team and a community review process, while Knots seems to be a project managed by a single developer, without external reviews: «Bitcoin Knots is a fork of Bitcoin Core. It seems to be developed by a single developer who Raise changes directly without pairs ».
DORSEY continued: «Bitcoin Knots launches are composed of the Bitcoin Core source code modified with a set of approximately 1,400 Commits (set of changes made in the code). The same individual issues the releases of Unilateral way. There are no indications that someone else has contributed directly or reviewed code or revised Bitcoin Knots. Bitcoin Knots is not supported by the Bitcoin Core project ».
In such a way, while the community continues with this intense discussion, several questions arise, some such as: is this a real debate about the course of Bitcoin or a controversy fed by misunderstandings and distrust?
For now, it seems to depend on who is asked. The truth is that, with almost 9% of the nodes opting for Knots, the final response to crisis times and controversies in Bitcoin is “more decentralization.”
