The CP-on-the-blockchain argument is just recycled FUD. It’s the same scare tactic that was used against Tor, end-to-end encryption, Telegram, and even Bitcoin itself back in 2013. They said the same thing every time: “Terrorists will use it.” “Criminals will abuse it.” “It must be filtered or shut down.” But here’s the truth: 🟧 Criminals already have better tools—encrypted drives, dark web forums, and private servers—none of which require a public, traceable, expensive blockchain. 🟧 Bitcoin is terrible for hiding anything. Every sat, every transaction is recorded forever. That’s the opposite of safe harbor for crime. Yes, open systems are messy. But the answer isn’t to filter at the protocol level. That’s not protection—it’s a backdoor for centralized control. The moment we let fear dictate what’s allowed on Bitcoin, we’ve handed the narrative to the same forces Bitcoin was built to resist. Freedom tech is resilient because it doesn’t rely on permission. It runs on incentives, not fear.

Replies (1)

As I see it, no one in this discussion is actually for censorship. The debate is whether to keep or ditch the filters. Keeping the 40/80kb OP-RETURN filters as they are won’t lead to more censorship. Removing them will open the door to new risks. I just don’t see why we should take that risk. I understand you believe the CP won’t come to the blockchain because (1) criminals have better tools and (2) Bitcoin isn’t great for hiding stuff. I’m not really convinced by those particular arguments. They don’t address the threat of deliberate state-level attack. Plus, I really wouldn’t want to relay or store CP with my node.