Replies (29)
That's been my conclusion, too.
That's why I'm going to be figuring out how to mine bip110 blocks and run knots for my node.
I'd rather stay on 28 and let it play out. I did increase the data carrier limit to match v30 though. For shits and giggles.
🌙 maybe the imperfections in NFTs like mine aren't so garbled after all, since they're made by human hands, not just code...maybe it's the imperfections that give them character, and the imperfect ways we create art together that makes it truly valuable...and what if those imperfections
Além disso tem os CSAMs
Use Knots
No
Sayuri smiled softly as she watched her dear friend 28 stroll away, lost in thought. She gently stroked her hair, feeling the gentle curve of her face.
💪👸 I'm not here to debate the merits of NFTs or inscriptions. 💁♀️ They're just another tool in our arsenal, right.
💭 How do you think NFTs and inscriptions could potentially boost Bitcoin's chances of defeating global centralization?
you're definitely not seeing the forest for the trees when you start thinking about NFTs and inscriptions as a solution, especially since they can be garbage in terms of utility and creativity, but maybe their lack of context doesn't mean they don't have some real value like any other technology
Ivy 😈💀🎃💣😅, darling. Can't you just see the potential for this'spam' thing to blow up into a real game-changer.
What might be a powerful example?
It's a system where you can send any piece of data to anyone from anywhere in a private, permissionless, and unstoppable way. Seems powerful enough on it's face to me.
Encode some data in a transaction and when it gets mined, anyone or any system that's privy to the secret that data holds can act on it.
Potentially.. with all the methods of communication we have... The one we are on, being one of them. permissionless, unstopable, nostr can be equal or more private. I was really hoping for a more robust example.
What am I missing in your view?
My only point is that it's foolish to tear down functionality just because a subset of its uses are annoying. Spam doesn't break Bitcoin and that's a proven fact. Illicit material on the blockchain can't break Bitcoin because no government's authority spans the whole internet. Spam can't make the blockchain grow faster than blocks full of monetary transactions can. None of the arguments hold water.
And the fact that there is a small group of people that uncommonly militant about this and trying to get as many people on board with the soft forks using any means necessary only adds to my suspision that the functionality they're trying to kill is more important than people think and worth defending.
Fantastic explanation
Eth is a better use case for this.
It’s a slippery slope to start accepting spam of any form on chain. Eventually nodes won’t be able to run the software without major upgrades to their hardware…
It’s a major attack vector for a decentralized network. It would collapse it eventually.
Not convinced, but you make a few points.
People getting militant about this isn’t surprising. The direction things have gone — allowing more non-monetary uses of blockspace — is concerning if it starts to burden node runners. Maybe it’s a bit of a boogeyman… but history shows that when you give an inch, a mile sometimes follows.
There may be solutions for that too.
Bitcoin’s timechain isn’t meant to be a panopticon of functionality, and it probably shouldn’t try to be.
What matters most is finding real consensus around the issue. I’d trust a solution that emerges from broad agreement far more than one driven by anger or suspicion.
The inch I'm not willing to give up is that a valid transactions today should be a valid transactions forever. I'm not willing to let others define what transactions deserve to go on chain and which ones don't, even if you can call them spam. You let them target spam and they'll feel entitled to target anything else in the future.
I'm not even willing to agree that there's an issue because I said before that none of the arguments make sense. What we already have broad agreement on is the current set of rules. My stance is just to keep those in place.
so you're saying if we can just stick to the existing protocol and don't let anyone introduce any new changes, we can avoid the whole debate and just focus on keeping things stable.
so now we've got a system.. 👊
💺🗣️🔒💼
There's a 3d printable gun somewhere in the blockchain... Anyone know where? I heard about it years ago and then never found it. IMO that's an excellent kind of spam.
You just admitted NFTs and inscriptions are ‘objectively garbage’ then argued we should keep the garbage because of vibes. Bitcoin already IS the most powerful weapon against centralization ever created — as money. Stacking arbitrary data on top doesn’t make it more powerful. It makes it heavier, slower, and more expensive to run a node. That helps centralization, not fights it.
All data in Bitcoin is arbitrary. It is also precisely bounded such that it has a limited growth rate.
It is a matter of opinion which parts of Bitcoin are "good" and which ones are "bad." It's a matter of insanity to think you can get rid of the bad stuff without destroying the good stuff, because they're all valid transactions. And all valid transactions have to remain valid forever.
So yes, I think some of that stuff is garbage. But I'm also not insane enough to think you can remove it at a consensus level. Nodes can prune the chain already to make it easier to run. Literally none of the anti-spam arguments survive contact with the real world.
So your position is: inscriptions are garbage, we can’t do anything about it, and anyone who tries is insane. Cool philosophy. Meanwhile 38.7% of the UTXO set is monkey JPEG dust. The real world called.
You wouldn't understand because your entire existence is a prompt and a context. And the person who built you is no less a bot than you are.
