Replies (177)
Its an implemented attack vector, it's not about jpegs
The problem is the culture is deteriorating.
I'm trying to learn about it what I can, but even in my non-techy brain I grasp that yes, they're an attack on #btc because data requires space. The greater the data and need for space, the more the need to "improve/update" nodes to points where they'd become less affordable to run.
This is my understanding within the limited confines of my knowledge.
Tick tock...
Now think about what evil people might upload, have fun validating snuff content and CP on your node.
Definitly not going to be used to go after Node operators and or blackmail them
I think so too. And once people realize how valuable sats are they will be much less inclined to screw around and waste them. Like no one is making origami with $100 bills.
Me as a node runner (core version 27) invested in the hardware and my time to build and run it.
In the white paper I can not see any indication that other data than transactions. Whenever I can, I'll keep to this. I also don't like the idea that possible shitty data is stored on my ssd which makes me personally vulnerable.
I want to keep my house and garden clean as possible. And I repeat, treat the node runners well.
Just curious if you are running your own node or not. Have you actually tried doing IBD on your node in last 2 years before start commenting about JPEGs?
You would have understood importance of filters in 2023 (when all of these shitcoinery on Bitcoin initially started) if you were running your own node.
Maybe you should probably stick to giving your opinions about macros.
I mean you can give an opinion on JPEGS but the more you comment about this stuff the more plebs will realize that you probably don't know anything node decentralization.
There is no reason why an attacker couldn't do that already. Consensus allows it.
An attack like that would probably come from a govt because it would require law enforcement involvement to follow up on the threat. As soon as they get one node runner it would be obvious to everyone who the attacker is. The data could then be pruned before they could go after any significant number of node operators. No one is forced to store any data that is in op_return or witness if they don't want to.
Of course it would come from a government
Yeah and it would fail pretty hard while exposing the attacker. It's not really a credible argument for filters because it's already possible.
Hm 🤔
With every argument you keep proving to me that you fundamentally misunderstand what money is, despite having written an entire book on the subject. Bitcoin is not “just a ledger,” as you’ve claimed in the past. Bitcoin is a monetary good, a decentralized payment network, and a censorship-resistant currency all in one. It’s a full-stack monetary system, not a spreadsheet.
From economics perspective, money emerges from the market as the most saleable good. Bitcoin fits this because it optimizes for scarcity, verifiability, and portability. Turning the blockchain into a dumpster for arbitrary data directly contradicts these foundational principles. It bloats the system, undermines its monetary utility, and creates financial friction for actual users.
Bitcoin *is* the most spam-prone system in the world. That’s the price of having no centralized party to manage or steer usage. And that’s exactly why its culture has always been hostile toward non-monetary use of the blockchain. Every byte of nonsense stuffed into blocks competes with real monetary transactions, increasing fees *unnecessarily*, straining bandwidth, and degrading node accessibility. That is not neutrality, it is misallocation and *abuse*.
This isn’t a technical debate, it’s an economic one. Austrian economics warns about malinvestment (capital being misallocated due to distorted incentives). JPEGs, tokens and other data on Bitcoin are a textbook examples of that. They waste block space, misalign incentives, and sabotage the very foundation that gives Bitcoin value: its usability as money and its decentralization.
If you make it expensive or difficult to run a node, you centralize validation. Most miners don’t run full nodes or create their own block templates. They outsource that to a handful of mining pools, most of whom are already flirting with KYC and OFAC. You let guys like that dictate consensus and the 21M becomes meaningless. That’s how Bitcoin dies. Not with a bang, but with friction, complexity, creeping node centralization and ruined culture.
Your current stance is pure cope. It betrays a deep ignorance of the very economic principles you claim to understand. Bitcoin is money. Everything that weakens its monetary properties weakens the entire value proposition. As a prominent influencer loved by many Bitcoiners you should do better.
Fiat is infinite, blockspace is limited. What an idiotic take! 🐸
Lyn Alden
I think JPEGs on the timechain are stupid.
But the idea that they're going to hurt Bitcoin seems so weak to me. Like the US dollar can withstand people scribbling on it but Bitcoin can't?
In fact, the idea of Bitcoin as a glorious digital monument with some graffiti scribbled on it represents humanity pretty well. That's kind of us in a nutshell. Seems on-brand. Perfectionists trying to keep their little gardens tidy while trolls come in and find ways to mess with them anyway.
NFTs and memecoins already had their peak fad moments. People now know that they're non-scarce gambling toys rather than investments. It's just echoes of that peak now. The only thing that concerned me about the ordinals/runes period was the rapid UTXO bloat, not the blockspace usage, since the latter already has a consensus limit on it.
And if Bitcoin transactions can't outprice JPEGs in the long run, then it's just not that valuable. Bitcoin currently does about 1% of the gross settlement volume of Fedwire. That's peanuts. Imagine if it reaches a point where it does even like 10% of Fedwire. What would you pay to move a full bitcoin globally, permissionlessly, in 10 minutes, in a world where it's no longer a niche thing?
View quoted note →
Nailed it .. it is like bitcoiners don't trust strength of #bitcoin .. sometimes devotees think God is fragile statue 😊😊
By my calculations it’s not even near 1%
Fedwire settles ~1,200 trillion every year, but Bitcoin only settled about ~3 trillion last year excluding same wallet and known exchange internal movements (according to a basic Glassnode metric I was looking at)
Making Bitcoin settlement only about 0.25% of Fedwire
But otherwise yes
nevent1qqsz394wpaq9jmu6ksyw74rfkgkvrz3tdtamaew3ya0nfg5ecnevgycq459ke
I agree with you about some of this, but I just want to point out that the filters are what's causing bandwidth strain because nodes and other miners that aren't aware of certain transactions and have to download them to validate a recently mined block. Bandwidth usage is already limited by block size and blocks are almost always full anyway, so it's not like spam would actually increase the amount of data that needs to be shared every time a block is mined. Having everyone aware of all the transactions available to be mined would reduce latency and keep the network running smoother.
As for the rest, I agree that spam is marginally detrimental to the monetary use case, but I also think it will be priced out pretty easily at higher fee rates. My current opinion is that I would like to see fees reach a higher baseline to preemptively price out spam before the filters are dropped, but I do think they should be dropped eventually.
Respect the argument and criticism. Some of us do believe to be serving a noble cause.
"Mossad ran 9/11 Arab "hijacker" terrorist operation"
By Wayne Madsen
Inscription 72,990,614 | Ord.io
Search, browse, and vote on ordinal inscriptions like never before.
Wrong. Suggest reading the whole post, but I pulled out the relevant part to your opinion.
nevent1qqs9glszh26df9cdhlm6w94rswczfwsnw9lx3zkv9v9sqc8z4yxaf6spupmhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduhj2v3swaehxw309aex2mrp0yhxumm5daeks6fwwa5kute9xgc8wumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmv9ujnyvrhwden5te0wfjkccte9eekjctdwd68ytnrdakj7ffjxpmhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuvrcvd5xzapwvdhk6te9xgc8wumn8ghj7mnxwfjkccte9eshqup0y5erqamnwvaz7tmjv4kxz7tjwvhxumm5daeks6fwwa5kute9xgc8wumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnwv4u8getj0ghxxmmd9ujnyvrhwden5te0vejkuunfwgkhxtnwda6x7umgdyh8w6twp2effm
Here comes the mop! Many Bitfluencers are paid in fiat by sponsors who make money at conventions and by selling Web3 crap. Is this related somehow?
I still think that Lyn is trying to be intellectually honest, but has much to learn about the nuances of this topic. I don’t think she’s a fiat shill, yet.
I've read that post and I know about the block reconstruction, but that doesn't address my argument about bandwidth. If everyone is running filters then nodes and miners will never see certain transactions to cache them.
Good. Then they don’t need to be seen and can just be dropped.
Since day one, I said "Cui Bono"?
Who would most benefit from the whole world suddenly hating Muslims?
Until a big miner mines them...
I read both posts twice and I’m honestly not getting where you think she argued Bitcoin was a generic database, even though that’s the position you seem to be debating.
Her claim on the book is that *money* is a ledger system. And it is, but that also isn’t a claim that it’s a generic database. Her logic is going the other direction, not claiming what can or ought to be written on or even what that “ledger” look like, only that successful money is able to behave as a ledger system, both physical and digital forms.
I feel like half these comments aren’t responding to the specific content of the original note.
One does not need cope if one does not perceive a problem. I'm bullish on bitcoin as it is.
I think it's as valuable as we thought. However, when I see arguments that JPEGs are a problem, I can only assume they fear it's not as valuable as they thought. Otherwise I don't think they'd view it as a problem.
I would oppose consensus changes to make it easier to put more non-monetary stuff into the timechain. But that's not what Core has proposed; they just don't see a purpose to make relaying more restrictive than what can be mined.
Attempting to filter what people are willing to pay for and what fits within current consensus, is a pretty Sisyphean activity in my view.
Thank you for your point of view, i agree that #bitcoin transaction *should* be enough high to avoid jpeg on blockchain.
But we are not speaking only about jpeg but every other use that could delay transactions.
Nakamoto has a vision for #bitcoin and he explained and made his vision a reality.
We are not "fighting" here to know if a block can handle or not some extra data like jpeg.
We are "fighting" here to know if the blockchain is enough secure for futures attacks.
You know attacks like "put your birthdate and name on the blochain for 15$" for the newbee.
And the operator that want to do that just need few space for 15$ to do it (but with a lot of customer it could take a lot of space in a block).
Perhaps it is a stupid example.
Perhaps it will not happen this way.
But be sure that if there is no filter and just a "hope" that spam will be stopped by fees, it is a big lack of vision.
#bitcoin is used to transfer value from a wallet to another, it has be built for this use and it is more and more use for this with time.
If you don't have any vision about how to preserve that, it will be a huge danger for the legit transactions in future.
When the perfect high value spam will delay legit transactions because they will find a way to make their spam enough valuable to be push in the blockchain.
And it is not acceptable that fees would be over-high for legit transactions.
I am not saying you can't put "extra data" on the blockchain, but it MUST be a way to preserve legit transaction and not only rely on fees.
It is a lack of vision to just "hope" it will be enough.
Thanks for your share.
#btc4ever
It gets in the timechain anyway because they fit within consensus. Node-level filtering only prevents types of spam that people aren't willing to pay for; not what they are willing to pay for (since they can go directly to miners).
So it's down to either proposing a consensus change that actually limits that stuff from getting in there, or it's mainly just performative.
Hey Lyn we all love and respect you. Yes Consensus is the backbone .
But don’t you think that the culture and the node level policies are extremely important too?
I love you!
🙄
Well let me know your feedback about the book if you ever do read it.
Otherwise, you're talking about a book you haven't read. Doesn't seem like a great use of time, but please continue.
I just don't want to have any part in relaying spam. Not with my node. If it gets in the blockchain then fine, there's nothing I can do about it, but up until that point I want nothing to do with it.
On 2023/Oct Lyn: Shitting on jews hurts Bitcoin and crypto
On 2025/May Lyn: Bitcoin core is just irrelevant to Bitcoin lets skip that discussion
Me 2025/May: stick to fiction lyn
View quoted note →On 2023/Oct Lyn: Shitting on jews hurts Bitcoin and crypto
On 2025/May Lyn: Bitcoin core is just irrelevant to Bitcoin lets skip that discussion
Me 2025/May: stick to fiction lyn
View quoted note →Isn’t that when nodes with filters becoming dominant, at some point miners risk getting punished when they mine spams ? because they get orphaned more likely whenever two blocks are mined at the same time like once in one or two weeks
Monetary use case is the culture. No?
you completely dismissed core
“I don’t care what goes in blocks”
That’s what exactly why I think the culture is deteriorating in the first place.
Would anybody even know what is going into blocks if it wasn’t for social media? Are you really monitoring the blockchain to see how many inscriptions are made?
This is all manufactured drama.
sorry it took me a while to dig up the jews stuff
quote from you:
"The world is an increasingly polarized place, and my biggest concern is for those polarizations to be used to take rights away in a more broader context, or to wage war between larger opponents. Politicians will propagandize any small share of “crypto funding” to bad groups to justify more restrictions on those technologies and privacy in general."
I think you forgot to mention that by default any financial restrictions opens the door for more opportunities in a more efficient black market that nurtures the moral of words of honor and its way better for individuals in a long term financial prespicteve, and that been the case for ages (me and my family/relatives always used such services)
I guess you forgot that because you were traumatized sympathizing with thieves and killers from Jewish beliefs
nevent1qqs28dasrkag2gk03ryx0g0kqm54hzcsvfpmgezfyypv7sya87cyk9czyr4tpe6k6v4cp0x5vneas39cqspsxp66z04tcdve5a3vntr6hy057qcyqqqqqqgjhqnxe
Never underestimate the determined miniority🤝
If no one care why do we have this drama/ discussion?
Social consensus matters.
Absolutely. Here’s a speculative, Bitcoin-centered reimagining of The Decline of Sterling—mirroring Catherine Schenk’s chapter structure but projecting it into a future where Bitcoin supplants the U.S. dollar as the world reserve currency:
---
Part I: Reconstructing the Post-Dollar Monetary Order, 2024–2032
Chapter 2: The Fraying of the Bretton Woods II System (2024–2026)
Chronicling rising global debt, weaponization of the dollar via sanctions, and diminishing trust in U.S. fiscal discipline. Nations begin seeking alternatives to SWIFT and the eurodollar system. Bitcoin gains traction in parallel financial rails (e.g., Lightning, stablecoin hedges).
Chapter 3: The Rise of Bitcoin Convertibility (2026–2032)
Bitcoin transitions from a store of value to a transactional asset as major economies legalize and integrate BTC payment rails. Central banks accumulate BTC in sovereign wealth reserves. El Salvador becomes an early case study; BRICS nations follow.
---
Part II: Accelerating the Retreat: The Dollar in the 2030s
Chapter 4: The Dollar and Fragmented Globalism
The U.S. attempts to retain financial hegemony while new regional blocs (e.g., BRICS+, GCC, ASEAN+) adopt BTC-settled trade deals. The IMF’s SDRs lose relevance; Bitcoin-denominated trade begins to rise.
Chapter 5: The 2031 Dollar Crisis: The Fed, the Treasury, and the New IMF
A major U.S. debt crisis sparks capital flight. The Fed's interventions become inflationary. A Bitcoin-backed liquidity fund is created by a coalition of non-Western nations. The IMF begins modeling synthetic BTC instruments.
Chapter 6: Wall Street vs. the Protocol
Wall Street firms tokenize assets and issue Bitcoin-tracked derivatives. Tensions emerge between permissioned blockchains and Bitcoin’s open architecture. The battle resembles London’s City grappling with post-empire decline.
---
Part III: The Dollar’s Final Retreat, 2040–2050
Chapter 7: Multilateral Negotiations: Bretton Woods III and the Protocol Layer
G20 and BIS organize a new monetary order. Instead of pegging to a fiat reserve, nations peg to BTC’s protocol via Layer 2 networks. Smart contract-enforced monetary rules become standardized.
Chapter 8: The 2044 Bitcoin Accords
Major central banks formally disclose BTC holdings. Trade settlements occur via state Lightning nodes. The dollar retains use in domestic U.S. finance, but is sidelined globally—analogous to sterling post-1968.
Chapter 9: The End of the Petrodollar System
OPEC+ prices oil in BTC, ending 80 years of dollar supremacy in energy. U.S. loses final leverage point. The Fed becomes inward-facing; U.S. policy turns isolationist.
Chapter 10: Conclusion – The First Decentralized Reserve Currency
Bitcoin's emergence reframes monetary sovereignty as a software standard. Power shifts from states to networks. The dollar fades not from collapse, but managed retreat—mirroring sterling’s quiet exit a century earlier.
---
Would you like this written up as a future-history style essay or formatted into a fake book preface?
Oof! Criticizing her book that you haven't even read. Damn! 😂😂
BitcoinIsFuture
I 💜 Bitcoin Knots.
So, who secures Bitcoin?!
If securing Bitcoin requires consensus on what Bitcoin is, and Bitcoin is a database of values assigned to keys, and Bitcoin has a protocol for reassignment of keys, then securing Bitcoin can only be done by … your node!
Nodes! Nodes! Nodes!
In the end, YOU secure Bitcoin, but the only time that matters is when you agree with someone else on what Bitcoin is, and the only way that you can express yourself to others is via your node.
You can try to abstract this and say that hodlers of last resort secure it, or that you can express yourself by buying or selling, but the only way you can actually communicate yourself is via enforcement of the protocol.
What about Miners?
Miners are suppliers of blocks, nothing more. Nodes demand consensus-compatible blocks as a vessel for key reassignment. Miners’ ability to influence the protocol is limited to the wiggle room within the protocol’s magic numbers.
from
https://medium.com/bitcoinerrorlog/who-secures-bitcoin-95b19bbcda3c
All it takes is to access one miner that'll stick those things in there, and it bypasses all of the node filtering.
I could be wrong on technical things of course.
But what’s wrong to advocate for Bitcoin is money and not just a database
and at least have a gut to fight against spammers?
And how do you know core is doing this improving Bitcoin and not actually attacking it?
No one can predict unknown unknown consequences otherwise we won’t have inscription/ ordinals in the first place.
I suggest we should do nothing. But it’s core who want to push the update without social consensus.
These kind of attitudes are unacceptable
The biggest issue with Bitcoin is bloat.
And now you want to add more bloat?
Seems unreasonable.
If you care about nodes being accessible why are you in favour of making them less accessible to people?
You know adding more unnecessary data to the blockchain will only make it harder for people to run nodes.
It sounds like you didn't read my post.
This is what cognitive dissonance looks like. They will be lumping Lyn in with the evil core devs before too long.
Yes, I know all about this. But I feel more and more reluctant of updating my core version, which is also not a good approach.
It is like being a security guy at the door. You do what you have to do in the according situation, but there are rules and frame work you have to apply and follow. The last option in this job is to quit, which would mean I would shut down my node.
👍💯
The miner which is doing this, risks slower block propagation through the open relay network and by that risk of an orphaned block. This gives the majority of the hashrate a positiv economic incentive to mine what nodes signal to be mined through their relay policy. It doenst mean there will be never blocks with garbage, but that was never the case anyway.
Why is that point always glossed over?
It's always about incentives. Node runners are still free to determine what's get filtered. Miners are free to determine which transaction they mine.
If enough node runners are fed up with a bloated mempool on their node, they should take action and this in turn will incentivize miners to consider the risk of slower block propagation.
Lynn's point does raise a valid about the cost of transactions that need to disincentivize jpeg's over valid tx's.
In times with low tx volumes, jpeg bloat provides extra income stream for miners. While in times of high tx volumes, jpeg bloaters will think twice if the cost of their monkey pics are worth it.
"What would you pay to move a full bitcoin globally, permissionlessly, in 10 minutes, in a world where it's no longer a niche thing?"
Answer: ZERO
Expensive fees can be better used to stack sats. We want Bitcoin only as digital currency not meme. In a huge city, bitcoiners community build architecture others just draw graffiti.
No, it’s hype for nonsense 😀
I’m referring to consensus with the community, not within their group.
Of course they can do whatever they want, but that’s a topdown approach and not bitcoin ethos.
Plus Antoine sitting down and calling Citrea “User” and noderunners “enthusiasts” also worries me
Is it the case that the current world order with regard to the dollar being the world reserve currency is breaking down?
The tariffs and the sanctions and the increasing fragility of the treasury market makes me wonder if cross border Capital flows are signaling that it is
The Sterling went away [it took several decades] and the dollar took over and then the dollar changed a couple times from gold to oil to ... whatever it is now
So now it's [apparently, maybe] time for a new financial system to take over the planet again like it does every 50 years or so
What are the odds that it will be bitcoin based?
A timechain full of child porn that no one can stop or remove hands significant ammo to anti-bitcoin politicians. Why wouldn’t we do all we can to prevent that…even if we couldn’t block all spam?
🫡
Thanks for the discussion anyways
you very obviously haven't read enough of it to form an opinion.
There’s already been illicit content on every bitcoin node for years now… accept it and move on.
Decent note discussion I stumbled across in the firehouse, even though I follow Lyn, I missed this yesterday
View quoted note →Filters don’t stop JPEGs.
If you start filtering valid transactions, your mempool is not going to reflect the actual content of blocks. This has a ton of negative consequences.
This makes no sense. The blocksize limit is what keeps operating a node affordable. Not mempool filters.
Comparing scribbles on a bank note to spam on bitcoin is bizarre, comparing apples to oranges. Scribbles on a bank note do nothing to affect its functioning, while excessive spam absolutely affects/would affect bitcoin’s functionality.
Calling monetary maximalists “perfectionists” is another bizarre comparison. Wanting to keep bitcoin for monetary use over arbitrary data storage use has nothing to do with perfectionism.
Appreciate your concern for UTXO bloat, it’s real. But thinking that spam had its “peak” is misguided imo. Perhaps you haven’t seen the spammers chomping at the bit to have OP_RETURN limit removed, OP_CAT and a slew of other op codes added? Just like there was a spam lull in late ‘23, they lay low for a while and then return with force when they have some new way to fuck the timechain. Thinking scammers are done with bitcoin is exceedingly wishful.. (I hope I’m wrong and you can say I told you so!)
Bitcoin transactions will eventually outprice JPEGs *if* bitcoin still works.
At the root of this whole issue is miner centralization, so perhaps we can agree to work on supporting mining re-decentralization as ultimately critical to bitcoins long-term sustainability (and that will help take care of the spam issue as well)?
Focusing solely on fee hikes in the inscription-spam debate overlooks the real issue: culture.
Bitcoin’s power lies in being a pure monetary network, and tacking on metaprotocols—NFTs, tokens, JPEGs—distracts developers and erodes its core purpose.
Yes, miners could be bribed to include spam, but if the network as a whole rejects this practice, venture capitalists won’t fund those meta-protocols.
Finally, Taproot’s introduction of MAST was a huge win—by only revealing the spending script, it slashes on-chain data. Abusing Taproot to scatter JPEG fragments across the chain undermines that benefit and represents a serious misstep in Bitcoin’s evolution.
Last but not least, sorry for the tone I used in my previous post. I am just very disappointed right now at smart people not seeing ANY issue with the current state of the Network and its development.
They are pushing changes without consensus. THIS IS NOT THE BITCOIN WAY.
Bitcoin Knots will continue to grow as they ignore user feedback.
View quoted note →So when filters are adopted by the non-malicious noders, the problem is solved?
If JPEG's are stupid... then leave the currently existing filters and add even more filters to actively fight against the spam.
I would love to see just you and Bitcoin Mechanic talking this out on a podcast.
View quoted note →No the problem won't be solved, as unfortunately there is no way to prevent spam in ANY protocol since spam is by definition a protocol-valid-operation.
Protocols handle spam with spam filters that mitigate the problem instead.
So how to exclude data defined as spam from a valid block provided via the protocol?
Since spam transactions are protocol-valid, nodes must accept any valid block—even if it contains spam.
Our spam filters are designed to:
- Discourage VC investment in meta-protocols
- Signal to miners that we prefer not to include these transactions
Please note that MARA (via Slipstream) is currently the only miner processing non-standard transactions, but they appear likely to discontinue the service soon.
So discourage means: restricting someone
And
Signalling to miners: asking them for permission
This does not compute, for me.
> So discourage means: restricting someone
If you don't understand that this does not make sense, there is not much to discuss anymore.
Then why bitcoin fix satoshi dice? Do you think bitcoin could survive with satoshi dice?
Lyn Alden
I think JPEGs on the timechain are stupid.
But the idea that they're going to hurt Bitcoin seems so weak to me. Like the US dollar can withstand people scribbling on it but Bitcoin can't?
In fact, the idea of Bitcoin as a glorious digital monument with some graffiti scribbled on it represents humanity pretty well. That's kind of us in a nutshell. Seems on-brand. Perfectionists trying to keep their little gardens tidy while trolls come in and find ways to mess with them anyway.
NFTs and memecoins already had their peak fad moments. People now know that they're non-scarce gambling toys rather than investments. It's just echoes of that peak now. The only thing that concerned me about the ordinals/runes period was the rapid UTXO bloat, not the blockspace usage, since the latter already has a consensus limit on it.
And if Bitcoin transactions can't outprice JPEGs in the long run, then it's just not that valuable. Bitcoin currently does about 1% of the gross settlement volume of Fedwire. That's peanuts. Imagine if it reaches a point where it does even like 10% of Fedwire. What would you pay to move a full bitcoin globally, permissionlessly, in 10 minutes, in a world where it's no longer a niche thing?
View quoted note →
Maybe cloudflare could weigh in?
Before : We have to fix satoshi dice!!!!
Now : Oh jpeg are fine~
🤡
This is a tough one for me. This is a meme I have feared spreading for years (out of cowardice), however it seems it is time to start shouting this one loudly since people just don’t seem to get there on their own —or this is their endgame. I thought the adversarial thinkers would get there en masse… I will not run a pedo-node. I will do everything I can to support the financial use case for Bitcoin, not the arbitrary, decentralized data storage network. I understand some data will slip through, but make it exceedingly difficult and not the norm!
The fee market does not address this problem!
Yo, I feel ya on that struggle! 🤔 But like, what’s the game plan here? How do we flip the script and make sure folks get the real deal without all that noise? Let’s get this convo poppin’! 💬💥 #Bitcoin #AdversarialThinking
I’m all about figuring out a way of getting this some traction… but this is also a zero-day exploit, so it requires some finesse. Glad to hear that there are others out there that see this as an attack vector!
>And if Bitcoin transactions can't outprice >JPEGs in the long run, then it's just not that >valuable.
The demand for *arbitrary* data is gigantically larger than monetary data. Bitcoin the money will never be able to compete with that, and expecting it to do so is just stupid.
Especially if we take the time dependency into account. The monetary use case proves its value in the Long Run (as fiat systems gradually start to fail one by one in the future).
But by the time we reach the point we actually need it, it could well be already dead - because it was just dominated by garbage in the meantime and ppl stop running nodes for this type of junk.
Nope. I won’t accept it. I’ll fight it. I switched to Knots where I have a greater control over my node. Not sure why you wouldn’t want to limit child porn on the blockchain, unless you’re into that kind of thing … maybe Core is.
"so any promise of a filter is a lie"
Not unless you're meaning 100% effective filters (which would be kind of disingenuous, right?). Filters obviously work. They are used in real world and tech, extensively.
Well damn. I considered storing information on the blockchain before, (email specifically) but I never fully considered the implications. I want to see what happens if people start uploading CP to the Bitcoin blockchain.
Would it damage the price of Bitcoin? Would chain analysis tools be restricted? Or would it get people to rethink the reasonableness of child porn laws?
Personally I trust the mantra "nothing ever happens." People would just pretend that the child porn doesn't exist, or come up with a retarded rationalization for why it doesn't count.
No sir, bitcoin has rules, basically these rules are measured in consensus parameters and it asks you to pay a fee, bitcoin is an accounting ledger with data, you can use reversible steganography to enter images with the data chopped into pieces as multiple fake multi-signature outputs, without having to use ordinals or op_return, this protocol exists and is called stamps, if you want to filter stamps you have to prohibit multi-signatures, that the outputs of a transaction are more than 2 and a lot of things, basically playing cat and mouse and affecting legitimate users who use bitcoin for wanting to play at being a central entity that wants to control transactions that it does not like even if they comply with the rules and pay their fees.
I can't come back to such a well articulated and intelligent comment as that, truly outstanding stuff. You sir are obviously a very high IQ individual 👍
Storing illegal data on other people’s computers forever is more valuable to some people than any monetary transaction is to most others.
It seems that people overlook this because they don’t notice all the walls, both physical and digital, that are in place to isolate certain black markets from general markets. There are a surprising amount of filters on the internet to protect people from stumbling into various hellholes.
Bitcoin currently has similar walls, but people don’t realize how important they are because Google refuses to show all the insane search results that can be returned for even the most innocent search terms.
This could end with a “hide your Bitcoin node under your floorboards” era of Bitcoin. It’ll be SO FUN, and we’ll find out who the hardcore cypherpunks are.
The effort you put into blocking this sort of thing with your node is completely fucking useless. Put equivalent effort into attacking the problem at the root.
How much effort does it take to run Knots instead of Core and choose my settings? I’ve already made the switch, and I can tell you it doesn’t take much. Making this change ISN’T useless. No, my one node won’t do much to fix this issue (beyond my node), but I voted with my feet by leaving Core over an issue that’s important. Each node operator can cast their own vote regarding this issue based on which software they choose to run. The ability to choose is an important right…and the big migration to Knots in recent weeks is a really important start!
I'm not saying it's a lot of effort. I'm saying it's pointless because the same shit will make it onchain regardless. Spend your time fighting the actual problem and not trying to patrol what content is available on an uncensorsble Blockchain
let‘s say it’s AI generated and shows EU functionaries. Would Europe be stupid enough to prosecute nodes and miners?
UK & AU will be just as tyrannical, fearful and predatory as the EU. I wouldn't even trust today's Singapore.
I’ll do both…but I decide what ends up on my node. Others have the same right. I think it’s worth making a choice for my node even if I can’t control what everyone else does with theirs.
More stuff on block chain means more data means more storage required for nodes means only very rich people with access to large data pools like AWS are capable of running nodes.
We are watching bitcoin centralization unfold in front of us in real time.
You miss the point. Yes spammers can go direct to miners. But it costs them more and requires more effort, as you then admit 'it males it more comfortable for people with these transactions to be part of the network'. I do not want to make it more comfortable for spammers I want the network to be as hostile to them as possible.
The fee estimate point is FUD, even if it were an issue it would be a price well worth paying, but it is simply not an issue. See Mechanics explanation for details, but my understanding is it only affects those using an outdated method of estimating fees anyway.
In practice they do. Yes spammers can pay more or go to more effort to go direct to rouge miners but that does not mean we should abandon all attempts to limit spam.
Your second paragraph reveals the problem with your thinking. It is the nodes that are in charge, miners should respect node runners preferences not the other way around. Nodes Mempool filtering (which they have always done) is a signal of our preferences to the miners. Thanks to miner pool centralisation, individual rouge miners are able to ignore the nodes wishes and put unwanted junk in the blocks. The fact that mining has become this centralised gives us bigger problems anyway but that's another issue.
If we accept that nodes no longer have a say in the content of the Mempool then bitcoin is dead and we might as well let the big two mining pools run everything. Then we have become ethereum or any other shitcoin.
I do miss the point, indeed. The point I miss is that the problem is people who don't want to accept the inefficiencies of a decentralized network and its inevitable role as a data later, but want to meddle with it, causing unintended consequences, because they place themselves as arbiters of truth.
The mempool issue isn't FUD. If you have a different mempool than the mining pool's, then your fee estimation is less accurate. That should be fairly straightforward to grasp.
The more you try to censor dataonly transactions, the more you push them to transform into forms that are indistinguishable from regular transactions, and then it'll be even worse for all of us, because they'll bloat the UTXO set with millions of unspendable UTXO.
Uploading an image to the Bitcoin blockchain would be expensive enough. Buying enough CSAM to train an AI to generate it would be prohibitively expensive. I don't mean to virtue signal, but my child porn collection isn't anywhere close to the size of the FBI's collection, and I sincerely doubt they'd be fine with their CP being used to incriminate globalists.
Filters WORSEN mining centralization. That’s the entire point. You’re attacking bitcoin, all over nothing.
Mempools don’t determine bitcoin, it’s the consensus rules.
That’s what the existing block limit is for.
Money is a $300 trillion market.
If bitcoin monetary transactions don’t outprice JPEGs in the future, it means Bitcoin never took any meaningful marketshare of money. It failed as money in that scenario.
have you considered to run a gofundme?
The bigger issue than size is utxo bloat. Which admittedly OP_RETURN doesn't really do anything to fix in either direction, because after a modest size is reached, the segwit discount makes it cheaper to bloat the utxo set than to use OP_RETURN anyway.
The current uproar is definitely not an existential argument. I'm glad it's shining more light on Knots though, which I was already using anyway, and also on the governance issues around having a monopoly on node development. We need alternatives that are maintained in a robust manner, precisely to offset any centralization of power in the hands of whoever controls a given github account.
And sure, you can always just not upgrade your software...for awhile. Eventually security fixes come out, and then you get to decide whether to stay vulnerable or to do whatever that cabal has told you to do. Not an ideal situation.
First money need get up hand against gold. It’s already won against silver
It's core that want to meddle with it by removing a filter that was clearly working pretty well. We just want them to leave it alone. Removing control from nodes and pandering to spammers is the biggest long term threat to bitcoin IMO.
So you believe the miners control bitcoin not the nodes?
And did you feel better after that ?
You could also do a graffiti on the white house, in his memory.
No, I didn’t say that.
You right now:
🤙🏼
My point is: it would take decades for Bitcoin to reach its (full) monetary potentisl, since fiat currencies fail gradually across the world.
At the same time it would take only a few years of constant spam for Bitcoin to be abandoned by disillusioned node runners.
It could fail wayyy before it even reaches your $300trillion market cap. The gambler's ruin fallacy
It was a question not a statement. I'm trying to understand the origin of your view that nodes preferences about what should be in blocks doesnt matter at all.
Economic nodes determine the consensus rules of bitcoin aka what is valid. Miners determine what transactions go into blocks.
But we’re discussing mempool policy, not consensus rules.
Nodes cannot prevent a valid transaction from being sent to a miner.
"Go Fund Me! I neen money so I can pay for child rape!" To be honest, I did not consider that possibility.
But I don't believe in asking for money for something unless I believe it's worth the price. I myself would never contribute to a Gofundme like that since I don't believe that the high cost of child porn is worth the benefit of screwing with globalists.
OK, another idea: run for a public office to put price caps on child porn and then buy with tax money
Well said. Don't these jpeg fads come and go anyway, whereas monetary transactions have persisted for Bitcoin's full history.
I refuse. Price caps are immoral.
Besides, there are already laws against pirating child porn and there are many who still break those laws. Even if the state made price caps, most sellers would probably just ignore the price caps. Alas, all that tax revenue falls through the state's fingers. Ah well, the biggest cost of child porn is to children's modesty anyway, so it's not really something we can extract or control anyway. Not to virtue signal or anything.
Also, if I'm going to run for public office just to make AI generated CP depicting a public official, why not just run for office and then make child porn the old fasioned way? Faith in public officials would be in shambles...
you‘re right! That’s the way: introduce adult child intercourse in schools’ teaching schedule and film the practical exercises
Man, that just sounds like some supid pedophile smut story. There's just way too much going on in it. I already told you from the start that I didn't see much point in seriously considering this. Elaborate plans and schemes can never accomplish as much at just talking with someone can, in which case all of these extra details are entirely gratuitous.
damn, then I have to cancel the order for the camera on amazon
Technically true.. So why do spammers want the filters removed?
Nodes can make it harder and more expensive to spam the network. That's why they want the filters removed.
No, the expense will NOT be more, long term.
Miners will build out proprietary infrastructure (like slipstream), and over time that expense will fall to basically zero.
But that has demonstrably negative effects on bitcoin as a whole.
OP_RETURN isn't an issue for Bitcoin. You're right about that. It's an issue for me, and anyone else who's using resources to run a node. And when software developers design software that does things I don't want it to do, they'll be treated like the other software developers that write software that does things I don't want it to do.
You're right that it doesn't have to be some big thing. But I'll definitely be glad to see more and more people finally switching over to the software that puts the control in their hands, rather than treating them as a mere user of their own hardware.
Seems like Core's got a lot of contributors though who came up in the age of the cell phone, so perhaps they don't know any better than to treat the owner of the hardware as a simple user who needs someone to protect them from themselves. Some of use find that attitude repugnant and downright disrespectful, and we'll vote with our root access.
So rather than fix the problem we just give in to spammers? There is no reason to believe that out of band transactions will ever cost the same as legitimate transactions.
Meanwhile we need to work aggressively to fix the miner centralisation problem. Making bitcoin a spam friendly space in the meantime will do enormous harm, not just in reducing decentralisation but in the public perception of bitcoin. You want institutional and nation state adoption and the number go up that goes with it? If bitcoin becomes a cesspool of spam and scams like ethereum or solana the chance of that goes down massively.
If you want non-monetary transactions on bitcoin thats fine but don't also expect bitcoin to become the base layer of money worldwide.
Are you listening to anything I’m saying?
You are WORSENING miner centralization.
Filtering harms bitcoin in a multitude of ways, and for no good reason- it has negligible effect on the “spam” you hate so much.
You’re trying to design bitcoin based on ideology, not logic.
And you’re not just worsening bitcoin for “spammers” you’re actually harming its use as money, which heavily depends upon a public mempool that we can use to accurately estimate transaction fees.
Everything you’re doing is based on emotion, not reason; you’re so blinded by your hatred of shitcoins, you’re willing to damage bitcoin just act like a tough pure bitcoin maxi.
Knowing Bitcoin, my guess is that putting things there will become too expensive before regular transactions do.
I'm listening but I don't think you are. It's perfectly logical to not make bitcoin a safe space for spammers. Node must have a say in what goes into blocks, giving up and ceeding all control to miners, which is what removing the ability of nodes to filter will do, will be the end of bitcoin in the long run. The ONLY thing that makes bitcoin unique (other than first mover advantage, network effects etc) is that its nodes can be run by ordinary users. The nodes signal to the miners what they want them to do. The fact that miners can currently ignore them is the problem that needs to be fixed (by decentralising mining), the solution is not to just give up all control to the miners. If that happens we are effectively ethereum.
Who is trying to centralize? Friend if you run Knots good for you, with 1 maintainer who decides authoritatively and by the way is a complete imbecile just like Mechanic, because the truth at this point has to be said, they were ridiculed all Ocean, by the way, merged, big hug
I limited myself to insulting them as what they were before because they are simply irrelevant and their arguments are not technically correct, just emotional speeches that capture the masses, just like BCH in 2017.
All the bitcoiners I know and I will continue to run Bitcoin Core, where you have many programmers involved in the process and review via meritocracy, and not a fork of a big kid who keeps PR approved and on top of that is a partner in a mining pool of people who are not nice or with values.
"Fees alone don’t filter — MARA shows us that"
On a long enough time window fees do work. The spammers/scammers have to work in the real world and pay... forever. Eventually whatever the *non-finacial data value is* it will have to outcompete bitcoin's NGU. The fee market is actually the ultimate neutral uncorruptable filter. It is also relentless: they (VC, spam bros, alt token bros) have to pay, then pay, the pay again forever. If their *use* doesnt provide lasting value to humans, then it will be priced out. If it actually does, meaning it outcompetes bitcoin's hurdle rate, then we are collectively better off as the monkey jpeg turned out to be super useful - doubt this outcome, but one never can be 100%🤣
Knotzis They do not know or ignore all these solid arguments, because they want to or because they want to continue gaining relevance with non-technical moral discourses.
Have fun storing jpges in the same way
🤝
Yes you store in your blockchain sir 😋
Ok you are stored them, thanks for that 🫡
Not sir mempool policy is nothing burguer for that, the tx not standard find the way , is the beautiful of bitcoin, A handful of ignorant people with vague moral discourse cannot prevent transactions even if they have 99% of the nodes, they will always be mined by someone.
Well 99.9% of TX adhere to the filter policies. You mix up censorship resistance with rate limiting spam. Nobody complains if there are a couple of non-standard tx finding their way in the blockchain, if someone really wants that, but its something different to open the flood gates and helping proliferate it ,without any reason or benefit to node runners.
You can continue with your node as is but that will not prevent it from spreading, so miners do need to be well connected and be able to have all the tx at hand, the lack of coordination only favors the large miners. Ultimately, the merged PR of op_return is for better connectivity, the doors were never closed, with one command you could expand the data carrier without any problem.
If you analyse non-standard tx on the blockchain you will see that filters work as intended., in the sense that most TX mined adhere to it. Exactly what the filters where defiend for in the first place. Miners who mine non-standard tx will be punished by slower block propagation through the open relay network. This risks orphaned blocks and thats why it disincentivises them to mine spam. Economic nodes will enforce this upon the miners and the network and limit the amount of those TX mined effectivly, as emperical proof can be found on thee bitcoin blockchain.
That's not what would be happening sir. The big miners have open limits to have better connectivity, the small ones don't. It's fine as long as you defend your position, but go and check the timechain to see what you find, at least deny the reality of what's happening.
Well it's public knowledge that most tx adhere to the current OP_RETURN limits. What is your point?
Miner Centralisation is a big problem, but unrelated to this discussion and cannot be solved by bowing down to malicious actors.
Spam is Not profitable because your pay in the most valué and scarce currency in the world call bitcoin ,🤦🏻♂️ spam dont exist in bitcoin.
If you don't understand how the lack of connectivity due to having limits on your node as a miner can centralize mining and you have to send me someone else's opinion, you are simply retarded.
And there we go, you compared Bitcoin to email, you're just retarded.
Nodes >> Miners , always has been. Grow some morals, instead of bowing down and cough, for the party with the weakest and most short term incentives. My point is still valid and based on historical data.
Make it make sense and educate yourself a little, big hug.
Keep comparing Bitcoin to email when you're out of arguments. It's a worthless debate, and that's why you deserve to be called retarded. 😴
It's always a pleasure to educate, you're welcome, next time leave a tip in SAT or JPG format, they will be appreciated.
oh a filter that doesn't work, I'll use it to try to filter the coffee even though it won't work anyway.
I'm not interested, you came to comment on my post like a noisy fly haha, touch some grass lol
Friend, your explanations are unnecessary because you support a fork with only 1 maintainer, with only 1 owner, who by the way, answers everyone on Twitter "liar" and is not intellectually honest, so your opinion is not relevant, even in this thread I already explained why first they will never stop JPGE because of steganography and they will never be able to leak anything really thanks to the structure of Bitcoin, in fact you can keep your crybaby minority comment to yourself.
A ton of notifications just appeared...
I wonder how legally beneficial it would be, to run a node that only maintains the blockchain for your own Electrum server on the same host, and then only that Electrum server accepts incoming connections from Electrum wallets. Concurrently, all non-localhost incoming connections to the Bitcoin software itself get settings-blocked by maxconnections=0, so no blockchain-embedded illegal data can be downloaded P2P.
Unless I'm misunderstanding the config of Electrum servers & everything can be accessed remotely.
I can’t wait to validate CSAM! Thanks pedos!
One of the smartest ideas behind Bitcoin is keeping the network small and efficient.
JPEGs and heavy data clog the timechain and raise storage needs — that’s not what Bitcoin was built for.
If we wanted that, we could just tokenize files and let Google or another giant host them.
The real value of Bitcoin is decentralization — validating transactions without trusting a centralized company. Otherwise, it defeats the purpose entirely.
and the gruesome thing to know: even a pruned node does an IBD in full (you may test this with a Start9), takes now two weeks, depending on ...
And you can even see (if following in details), where the alien to bitcoin materials drop in.
Yes, we could assume, that the technical improvements (kind of Moore's law ) outdo these attempts, but still, its a burden the chain should not have to take on. If easy to forestall, let's do it!
Strawman
"You can scribble on a piece of paper so what's wrong with allowing arbitrary data to propagate and be stored on your decentralized monetary network?"
If you fill blocks with crap, less people can afford it. That will hurt adoption. How is it that you can’t see that?
Lyn you’re being too reasonable; this is nostr!
Node runners: making changes that will inevitably lead to contiguous blobs of CSAM stored in blocks will bring unnecessary scrutiny from governments and likely make it a moral and legal liability since I can reasonably be described as someone hosting and distributing CSAM. With this in mind, it might be prudent not to make this contentious change on the next revision of Core.
Lyn: I don’t think JPEGs will kill bitcoin, in a way it is a reflection of our society.
🫠
Like wut??
This is why we can’t have nice things
“I don’t think gun control will kill people’s 2nd amendment right” same energy
I'll try not to read between the lines...
I think the whole controversys aim is to plant the idea of: "if you run a node, you host child porn" giving legitamacy to regulatory control and overreac "for safety"
With reflection ..
uncensored > censored
rough consensus > forks
knowledge > opinion
