The solution to the knots debate (or whatever it's called) is that the both sides must realize that every Bitcoin transaction is spam.
Login to reply
Replies (53)
Fee-based spam.
Maybe this is obvious but I don't see it mentioned anywhere: everybody cares very little about transactions from people they're not involved with paying other people they know nothing about, it's just spam from the perspective of people not involved.
Also some random message written in an OP_RETURN is still more valuable (for anyone) than, for example, a financial transaction between two objectively evil people, for example, or, say, from mortal enemies of whoever is judging. In this sense a normal transaction can be worse than mere spam.
All of that considered, even your own transactions are still spam after they have been acknowledged as received then spent. At that point they're not even valuable to you anymore.
The entire blockchain history is spam.
Please let me know if I'm wrong, but if both sides realized this objective truth we could finally take some real moves to reduce spam.
Ideally we would transition to some complex client-side-validated scheme like shielded CSV, Tachyon or Intmax2 or whatever (I stopped trying to understand these things deeply since it apparently makes no difference towards our chances of improving Bitcoin).
Since none of that is possible we can take the second-best choice: reduce the blocksize, activate BIP-300 and BIP-301, let people use sidechains with these magnificent antispam ultrascaling properties to make actual financial transactions without burdening anyone else with their spam.
I don't think that's the solution
No, spam refers to transactions not fit for pupose, not "transactions I don't like/care about".
Spam ➕️ & Spam ➖️
One man's spam is another's musubi 😁
Stupidest take ever
Facilitating the transit of a financial transaction used to do the worst kind of evil is more repulsive than facilitating the transit of any other blob of data. Bitcoin is money for enemies. The fee market is the only anti-spam mechanism that works.
Yes, exactly.
I don't think the fee market is super great (because it doesn't reward those that bear the biggest burden of carrying the data), but it's the only thing we have.
Spamalamadingdong
Until Nostr has this kind of retarded devs, it's unlikely to get any meaningful adoption among plebs and non-bitcoiners.
This is also one of the reasons why Nostr doesn't have high signal to noise ratio when it comes to core vs knots debate.
View quoted note →
Retardation level reaching orbit 🚀
The issue isn't with "transactions", it's with arbitrary data in transactions.
What you said was complete nonsense; it makes no sense whatsoever.
That's the point... to point out the nonsense. He's fighting fire with fire here.
every transaction not made by me or received by me is spam
Who put the spam in the spam-spam-spam-spam-spam, who put the spam in the spamalamadingdong?
Okay run knots because Bitcoin is money not data storage. That's it
The solution is that knots create a version of Bitcoin that does everything except financial transactions.
:taps head meme:
View quoted note →
ahahaha nailed it, just look at these comments
From my perspective all of your txs are spam!
Few.
Yep, a peer-to-peer electronic spam system just like the whitepaper says.
None of this would have ever happened if people wouldn't put pineapple on pizza
What you're saying is that i can pay you with a single transaction with no verifiable transaction history and not broadcast it to the rest of the network to not bother them with our spam? 🤔
Disagree. Monetary transactions build the market that feeds us. Not spam even if I'm not a direct participant.
You’re fun
if a transaction created a UTXO set and that data was lost/pruned, nobody could rebuilt that UTXO so it cant be spent or received, so if you want bitcoin as money to work, you have the cost of storing those unrelated to you and the benefit of being able to spend/receive, thus have bitcoin as a functional system.
the transactions in blocks are also needed to reconstruct/validate the chain from genesis.
not allowing or having other kinds of data is unrelated and doesnt/shouldnt cause that problem
True, and every inscription is a thermodynamic transaction. There is no separation between message and value; between information and money. The inscription is the expenditure that commits energy to memory.
In 2 years nobody will remember Knots. Their belligerent approach talks more about them than their words tbh.
Wrong. Spam has 0 value. Monetary transactions are what transfers value.
If blockspace is paid for in conserved energy (satoshis), the transaction is inherently monetary because the act of inscription itself requires irreversible work. In physics, no information is recorded without energy expenditure; therefore, no transaction exists without cost.
Inscriptions are an expoit that the compromised Core devs did not patch intentionally.
They rejected Luke's fix.
Inscriptions are fixed in Bitcoin Knots.
As for the physics, you can expend energy doing 0 value bullshit for example creating spam and you can expend energy creating valuable resources for humanity.
See the compromised Core devs who rejected Luke's PR that fixes inscription spam. They are the bad actors (the NACKers)
They revealed themselves with their public comments on OP_RETRUN being dishonest and manipulative.
The guys that ACKed are the good guys we have.
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29187
Bitcoin Knots has fixed those issues.
View quoted note →
GitHub
datacarriersize: Match more datacarrying by luke-jr · Pull Request #28408 · bitcoin/bitcoin
Updates -datacarriersize to be effective with newer datacarrying styles.
Do you comprehend what is going on with the Core devs and that majority are compromised?
Bitcoin Core Getting Deprecated
#bitcoinknots🪢 #bitcoin #nostr #anarchyⒶ #decentralisation #freedomtech #blockchain #freepalestine 🇵🇸
View quoted note →
You may have missed Who triggered this change and Why. Hint, Citrea.
View quoted note →
In short because Core devs are compromised.
Same change on BSV resulted in CSAM on their blockchain.
View quoted note →
View quoted note →
View quoted note →
From a a different perspective, the word inscription comes from the Latin inscribere: in (“into”) & scribere (“to write”). It literally means to carve into a surface, to make a mark that endures.
Every Bitcoin transaction is therefore an inscription in the truest physical sense: energy is irreversibly expended to engrave information into a finite medium, the ledger itself. It is thermodynamic writing.
So while one can waste energy on meaningless computation or spam, Bitcoin distinguishes value not by content but by conservation. Only those inscriptions paid for in conserved satoshis, the quantized work of the system persist as structure. Energy without conserved record dissipates; energy committed to the ledger becomes time.
This is why every valid transaction is an inscription, and every inscription that pays for blockspace is a monetary act of physics. Every bit has a price.
Im not sure if you’re a man of faith, but would putting real human obituaries on the chain be considered spam if the bits are paid in sats? Because I see no second best medium for inscription. Show me another place that won’t forget. Bitcoin is far superior to stone.
I agree Lopp is a bad actor, especially after his bullshit quantum proposal.
I’m not here saying what is right or what is wrong regarding protocol. I’m just objectively saying that all transactions are inscriptions, and there literally is no second best medium to Bitcoin.
Now see the definition of scam. The check how many people have been scammed to pay for NFT spam.
After that consider the following in your analysis.
Core devs are compromised.
Core V30 is a malware.
Run Bitcoin Knots, it fixes not only OP_RETURN but also inscriptions spam which Core devs intentionally allowed.
View quoted note →
I know that, that is why I am trying to argue with you to have in your analysis the consideration that spam has 0 value. And even if someone is paying for it, it does not make it valuable, it makes it a scam. Thats what they are after. Jpegs are spam on the Bitcoin monetary network. See also what Nick Szabo is writing about the cost inferred on all node runners, not only the one that pays for a particular transaction. The big picture goes beyond the physics of the system.
These are the inscriptions.
This is the Bitcoin Monetary Network. They are not the same.
This is the Bitcoin Monetary Network. They are not the same.
Selling a JPEG is a scam because nothing is actually owned. On Bitcoin, there are only UTXOs and the satoshis appended to them, the rest is illusion. A JPEG once hashed into the chain is owned by the ledger itself, by conservation, by every validating node.
An inscription, however, can still have meaning even if its content has no monetary resale value. Again, writing an obituary into the op_return field is not a scam if the purpose is permanence. The service being sold is not ownership of data, but the guarantee that it will never be forgotten, memory preserved through energy expenditure.
What most call a “non-monetary” transaction still carries thermodynamic cost. If satoshis are spent to commit bits to the ledger, then value exists by definition, because the value is conservation itself.
The real disagreement is not about the content of transactions, but about who decides what deserves to be conserved, what humanity considers worthy of permanence in the only ledger that remembers forever.
Well said @fiatjaf
While I don’t want my RaspberryPi node relaying and storing what I consider as spam on bitcoin, I can appreciate these users of the network paying _elevated transaction fees_ to help secure my savings.
It’s not worth getting your #KnickersInAKnot
My view is that the Bitcoin devs or contributers who voted in favor of fixing the inscription spam exploit are not compromised.
Also those who voted against OP_RETURN change from 80 to 100 000 Bytes. Luke. Leo and Mechanic for example have good faith. Nick Szabo too.
Its true that I don't make strict difference between the 5 maintainers or the rest of the contributors.
If below is the correct current list I am not sure only for Hennadii Stepanov. All the rest I consider compromised because of their actions and their communications.
"Andrew Chow, Hennadii Stepanov, Michael Ford, Marko Falke, and Gloria Zhao"
But in addition to them Peter Todd, Sjors, Antoine, Murch, Peter Wuille, jb55, Jameson Lopp, Benthecarman and others are compromised as well.
See the compromised Core devs who rejected Luke's PR that fixes inscription spam. They are the bad actors (the NACKers)
They revealed themselves with their public comments on OP_RETRUN being dishonest and manipulative.
The guys that ACKed are the good guys we have.
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29187
Bitcoin Knots has fixed those issues.
View quoted note →
GitHub
datacarriersize: Match more datacarrying by luke-jr · Pull Request #28408 · bitcoin/bitcoin
Updates -datacarriersize to be effective with newer datacarrying styles.
Memecoins are shitcoins and a scam. They have some small value becuase some scammed people paid for them. 99.9% regret it after they get rekt and/or rug pulled.
Bitcoin is different and that is why it is valued at $2.2T currently. Again its not hard to come to consideration that spam has 0 value. Also no one was arguing against to possibility to put hashes up to 40 or 80 Bytes in OP_RETURN. 100 000 Bytes of spam is an attack on Bitcoin.
Fees plus spam filters are better than just fees.
Bitcoin is thermodynamically sound money, not thermodynamically fucked up spam and csam.
Fees plus spam filters are better than just fees.
Bitcoin is thermodynamically sound money, not thermodynamically fucked up spam and csam.
That makes sense.
The reason I focus on the maintainers is that all of the compromised devs in the world doesn't do squat unless someone with commit access is willing to merge their PR's.
See the compromised Core devs who rejected Luke's PR that fixes inscription spam. They are the bad actors (the NACKers)
They revealed themselves with their public comments on OP_RETRUN being dishonest and manipulative.
The guys that ACKed are the good guys we have.
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29187
Bitcoin Knots has fixed those issues.
View quoted note →
GitHub
datacarriersize: Match more datacarrying by luke-jr · Pull Request #28408 · bitcoin/bitcoin
Updates -datacarriersize to be effective with newer datacarrying styles.
Another view:
From a node perspective wether something is spam or not is just a subjective opinion.
From the Bitcoin system perspective nothing in the blockchain is spam objectively: any transaction was considered as valid by at least one node.
Yes that is true. But I also notice that contributes can vote and it seems that their vote counts or at least in the cases where it favours the maintainers ...
Because we have seen double standards too.
Exactly the inscription fix was rejected by compromised Core devs, achow101 in particular, as being "controversal" but OP_RETURN change was accepted by them as if it is not controversal.
Absolute double standard clowns.
Here, its the same link from the vote screenshot
Here, its the same link from the vote screenshot
GitHub
datacarriersize: Match more datacarrying by luke-jr · Pull Request #28408 · bitcoin/bitcoin
Updates -datacarriersize to be effective with newer datacarrying styles.
You are spam, I am spam, we are all spam spammy spam 😂✌️🥕
nostr:
View quoted note →
That is why we also preach hodling, so that people stop spamming the blockspace with their moronic transactions. If you really need to divorce yourself from your bitcoin just pass opendimes and satscards.
The blockchain isn’t spam—it’s the consensus-driven, immutable record of Bitcoin’s movement and spirit. Spammers are the ones who drown out real signals with noise and nonsense. I care about other people’s transactions because they give me price data and cash flow insights. But I don’t care about anything on-chain that doesn’t provide that kind of information.
To “spam the chat” is a DDoS attack, not just some arbitrary line about what’s acceptable. Bitcoin works because it’s designed to disincentivize spam. If someone’s pushing to incentivize spam, that feels off. The real question isn’t how to fill block space, but why block space is so cheap. That cheapness is the signal we should be decoding.
That's knot funny