Thread

Zero-JS Hypermedia Browser

Relays: 5
Replies: 14
Generated: 22:09:11
avatar
Parman - Activate OP_GFY now!! parman@nostrich.cc npub1ltt9...k97y
I hate censorship. Filtering out non-monetary data on Bitcoin is objective, and is not censorship at all... Because Bitcoin isn't a general speech platform - it is a specific speech platform allowing the movement of bitcoin. There already exists an unstoppable speech platform, notes and other things transmitted over relays (NOSTR). No transfer of Bitcoin from one address to another can be censored from Bitcoin. Payments are essentially censorship resistant. Arbitrary data is not, and should not be - that'd be inventing a different purpose for Bitcoin. If a particular transfer got blocked because it has arbitrary data, the exact same transfer can be reattempted without the arbitrary data and it will get through. Inscriptions data inside an "if false(data)" block is objectively not part of the attempts to make a financial transaction. It is objectively added on as arbitrary data. It can be filtered out without stopping the movement of that particular UTXO. The perpetrator can simply republish the transaction without the arbitrary data and the exact same satoshis will move where they want it to go. Does this kind of argument have a place, Gloria? image
2025-10-06 09:08:33 from 1 relay(s) 11 replies ↓
Login to reply

Replies (14)

avatar
Hawk Battlehawk@0xchat.com npub1mkzy...27rs
Censorship is the act of preventing someone from expressing a particular view or opinion altogether. Filtering doesn't attempt to stop it at source. It is merely a discernment in what one wishes to hear. It's the difference between banning an account from a platform, and allowing users to mute other users as they see fit. There's a big difference.
2025-10-06 09:15:40 from 1 relay(s) ↑ Parent Reply
avatar
Ken πŸŽ‹ japanhodl@iris.to npub13ar5...3uwh
¯⁠\⁠_⁠(⁠ツ⁠)⁠_⁠/⁠¯ nostr:nevent1qqsr4mv0kfpch9wwmwakmgq34qmxma2qth0dvcthr38h2hlfr99aeucpz3mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfdupzpr68f2ahpsuc0lm7j07ancquht0zmt263v6xn7s6hg5esgapem5fqvzqqqqqqy6asx3x
2025-10-06 09:49:18 from 1 relay(s) ↑ Parent Reply
avatar
zaytun zaytun@zayt.space npub1wnw8...45pr
Is unfortunate (and fun), and wouldn't (read shouldn't) be accepted if he made those transactions today. I guess you can say, as the creator of this "specific speech platform" satoshi gets the privilege of having snuck those in when nobody cared. Doesnt mean everyone else should be able to today.
2025-10-06 10:42:30 from 1 relay(s) ↑ Parent 1 replies ↓ Reply
avatar
S!ayer npub1ehkv...mz4s
So the protocol has changed since Satoshi left his inscriptions, or at least, there's developers out there with a cohort that want to change the protocol so that these messages aren't in the txn? So now we shouldn't be able to write a message in the txn because?
2025-10-06 12:25:46 from 1 relay(s) ↑ Parent Reply
avatar
zaytun zaytun@zayt.space npub1wnw8...45pr
Because today it has become more obvious that keeping the protocol strictly focused on being money only, "specific speech platform", is imperative for its success. Apparently, this wasn't as obvious enough at the time of the genesis block to make satoshi refrain from taking that liberty. However, the genesis block example is not comparable to the "jpegs on the blockchain" example, as that is orders of magnitude more hurtful than the famous gensis block inscription. Today though, if you asked me whether I'd rather that satoshi had never done that inscription - so it wouldnt be used as precedent today - or i'd rather accept future transactions bloat the blockchain with arbitrary data, sure I'd wish he hadnt taken that liberty.
2025-10-06 13:07:37 from 1 relay(s) ↑ Parent 1 replies ↓ Reply
avatar
S!ayer npub1ehkv...mz4s
But you fail to see that the "bloat" is paid for in fees. The more bloat, the higher the cost to put that in the txn. Doesn't matter anyway because you use a third party side chain known as lighting to process instant p2p and not Bitcoin itself, so it's already gone past the monetary and bloat issues and is on side chain with no fees on chain (unless channels are closed or opened) It's current trajectory is very off the original, but I guess we can change the protocol to fit the consensus
2025-10-06 13:15:21 from 1 relay(s) ↑ Parent Reply
avatar
zaytun zaytun@zayt.space npub1wnw8...45pr
With respect, I dont fail to see that at all. I just don't agree that arbitrary data is a valid competitor for blockspace. I personally don't give a sh** what the original idea was, however brilliant it really is. It's like discussing religion. I DONT NECESSARILY CARE WHAT THE BOOK SAYS if it's completely incompatible with reality. Satoshi seems to have been an incredible mind who gave the world one of the most important gifts in the history of mankind. We need to be stewards of the project and use our best minds to carry that project forward, not look back at satoshi and require of his past tence to "guide us in how we should proceed". I think that approach is incredibly disrespectful to his mind anyway. If I was him, I would be thinking "I gave you guys something good, can u please use your own intelligence to carry it forward"
2025-10-06 14:16:46 from 1 relay(s) ↑ Parent 1 replies ↓ Reply
avatar
S!ayer npub1ehkv...mz4s
Just because you don't see it, doesn't mean it's true. It already has data in it. Satoshi has inserted text into the txn multiple times, as have many others. It's not unfathomable to have Bitcoin based mortgages or bonds or contracts, all on chain, but you opt for third party networks to process your transactions. No wonder Satoshi left the project and moved on to other things. There's a lesson on that.
2025-10-06 18:53:53 from 1 relay(s) ↑ Parent Reply