it seems much more likely that luke would hardfork to make filters consensus, as that is the intended (but ineffective) purpose of filters: to block data transactions.
Login to reply
Replies (4)
Zoom out
It’s about choice.
Core doesn’t get to decide the user does.
Maybe. But he's worked against an accidental hard fork in the past, and Core is the one implementing a controversial change despite backlash from Bitcoiners. Knots is preserving filters and settings that were already in place.
I'm just saying, regardless of who is more likely to actually take that step if it goes that far, Core initiated the divisive change.
The default value of OP_RETURN on Knots is 42 Bytes intended for hashes.
Knots gives node runners the FREEDOM to change the value to whatever they want in their mempool.
What does core do?
CENSOR contributers, people and opinions.
SPAM the Bitcoin monetary network with jpegs and shit by removing limit on OP_RETURN.
GASLIGHT that it does not know the meaning of spam.
COPE - your post is an example of that.
The holy edition would be the version that actually figured out how to stop the spam without useless cat-and-mouse filters. 😇