MINING POOLS THAT CENSOR BITCOIN TRANSACTIONS ARE AN ATTACK ON BITCOIN. ANY SELF RESPECTING MINER SHOULD NOT MINE WITH SUCH A POOL.
ON A POSITIVE NOTE, POOLS THAT DO NOT CENSOR WILL EARN MORE IN FEES. BITCOIN WORKING AS DESIGNED.
Login to reply
Replies (42)
Self regulating is a charm
That's saying it with your chest!
This is acceptable use of all caps!
🤣🫂💜
Every pool censors by nature of their nodes excluding txs that fail to meet the mempoolminfee.
What mining pool do you recommend?
But the branding
Governments censor txs. Mining pool selects txs. Miners can choose their pool anytime.
View quoted note →
Hash will follow the incentives.. Are Jack & Jimmy in w/Ocean? caught just a bit of the livestream when they were touring the hydro dam, thought I saw them.
I'm sorry, but anyone putting their skin in the game can tell any transaction to fuck off whenever they want. If it wasn't the case, the network wouldn't build on top of their block.
The ordinals clowns love to dance around and tell you "It's allowid. There's nothing you can do" and if someone wants to leave a little money on the table to offer a counterpoint, cry harder about it.
WRONG. 4 MINING NODES DICTATE THE BLOCK CONSTRUCTION FOR OVER 75% OF ALL BLOCKS ADDED TO THE CHAIN.
INSCRIPTIONS ARE AN ATTACK ON BITCOIN AND I AM HAPPY LUKE IS BLOCKING THEM.
FREEDOM TO EXCLUDE IS AS IMPORTANT AS FREEDOM TO INCLUDE.
THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ETHOS OF BITCOIN.
THERE ARE OVER 200k TRANSACTIONS WAITING TO BE ADDED TO THE CHAIN, MINERS HAVE ALWAYS DICTATED WHAT GETS ADDED. ASSUMING “MY GAME THEORY” WILL ALWAYS DICTATE THE TRANSACTIONS WITH THE HIGHEST FEE WILL GET ADDED IS LOW IQ THINKING AND HAS ALREADY BEEN PROVEN WRONG MANY TIMES, SEE LUXOR, FOR EXAMPLE.
CORE SHOULD HAVE FIXED THIS ISSUE LOMG AGO. DO BETTER MATT, MINERS HAVE ALWAYS BEEN ABLE TO DO THIS AND HAVE DONE SO.
LUKE ISN’T ATTACKING BITCOIN. YOU MUST KNOW THAT.
*Investor
The debate on censoring ordinals seems to be a classic example of time preference. If you think that ordinals are a gimmick and have no value then wait them out. If you are able to have low time preference you know they will eventually not exist due to their lack of value. To try to censor the transactions is a high time preference decision trying to push your own value system onto the network. Let ₿itcoin do what it does and wash out the high time preference players.
Did i hear correctly they are aslo blocking coin joins?
₿Itcoin won't fit your structure, get over it, ₿ will whatever the fuck it wants
Anyone that creates a valid block is free to put whatever transactions in it they want, including none. If you don't like the block templates that a pool creates, you are free to not use that pool, or find one that allows you to create your own block templates.
IMO pools can mine whatever transactions they want and miners can choose to mine with them or not.
Ocean's sin was acting in bad faith by false advertising about their pool.
which pool is blocking coinjoins?
Ocean mining Luke trashjr and friends
Luke is a narcissist - a bad actor - a dogmatic enemy who shouldn't be allowed near bitcoin
No, this is a bug in Samourai's implementation.
Other conjoin implementations work fine afaik.
Nothing was false advertised
I believe @Luke Dashjr was clear that they will do such things and that the template is transparent, and that if miners don’t like it they can hop to another pool. Honestly that’s what I got from the conference. 🤷🏻♂️
Sorry to say that but Luke lost all his integrity after he lost many bitcoin just of pure stupidity and then called for the FBI!
Is this accurate? Doesn't sound like a bug, but choice of allowed spec.
View quoted note →
It's a bug if they expected it to work under the 40 byte spec.
If they knowingly exceeded it... Then what are they complaining for? That's on them
40 byte was before taproot?
Honestly, dropping the ball on this one. You're sustaining a spam attack on Bitcoin this way, hurting its early adoption as money.
Bitcoiners are so trained against "censorship", they mistake everything for it. This can then be weaponized against them, by flooding the chain with spam and making it unusable for small users.
Do you consider nostr relays filtering token airdrop spam to be censorship? Because that's exactly the same thing. Relays have rules on what messages they relay, just like Bicoin nodes and miners already do. So Bitcoin is already "censoring" now.
If nodes decide to filter certain tx, then those will no longer be valid tx on the network. This has been the case since day one for tx that are too big, double spends, wrong coinbase tx, etc.
Wake up Neo, Bitcoin has been "censoring" since day one...
Another good reason to opt out of pools and decentralize more.
Out of curiosity, how does JoinMarket fare in these comparative discussions over OP_RETURN?
JoinMarket coinjoins work just fine in either setting or are they in same boat as Samurai here?
If JM is unaffected. Then does Samurai's different "setup" make these txns stick out like a sore thumb?
(Apologies for my non-techy understanding)
As far as I know, this is a Samourai only issue.
It doesn't make sense for coinjoins to dox themselves like this in the first place.
OLIGOPOLIES CONTROLLING MINING POOLS IS A PROBLEM. COMPETITION IS WELCOME EVEN IF IT MEANS ALTERNATIVES WITH DIFFERRING OPINIONS/TEMPLATES THAN WHAT YOU'D LIKE
(i love nostr)
Sure one can identify a coinjoin tx onchain but it doesn’t dox anything other than being a coinjoin tx. One cannot tell which input/output belongs to who.
#Ocean is the #Pool I would use. I don't want any shady stuff..👍👏🧡😊
Their existence damages Bitcoin. They must be eliminated, exterminated, forth with..💀
If ordinals are utilizing a bug, the not including them is more like aworkaround than censorship.
All I can say is, truly, you have no idea what you are talking about.
Thanks for your opinion, but I don’t care!
🙏
Most miners will never see this msg and do not care. They just want the pool that earns them the most profit. Fortunately, these two things are aligned.
a few dollars / adoption for betraying the uncensorable property....hmmm, I'll pass thanks.
Quit larping and read my message again. Bitcoin is already "censoring". Bitcoin already has rules that "censor" certain tx.
Adding a spam filter is not the censorship you should fear, from the comfort of your cosy couch. Meanwhile people with less means that need Bitcoin more than you are priced out.
That's the adoption I mean. Not the dollar signs you think about when you hear the word adoption.
@jb55 can you add a fix-case filter? :-)
Bitcoin was not designed to store arbitrary data, that is a plain and simple fact. Measures were taken to avoid spam of random data on the chain. However, if fees cannot sufficiently counter a spam attack, other actions might be required. If this situation continues for a year, you'll see opinions on this changing quite fast.
Are you comfortable explaining to people in need that they can no longer rely on Bitcoin as they should understand it's more important that degens can post butt jpegs on chain? That they're ignorant and should have anticipated this as Bitcoin is not only money but also a costly database for storing random data?
Spam filtering is a normal procedure in many technologies, it's dishonest to compare such a thing with government censorship. Everyone will know gov censorship when it happens.
If nostr relays would be filtering token airdrop spam, would you call that "censorship"? Because that's exactly the same thing. So I guess Nostr is not uncensorable? Please expand on this point.