similer idea to ordisrispector, didn't work.
Discussion
"...didn't work."
ergo nothing will work, right? Right?
There isn't an infinite amount of nodes that are sending out these transactions. They can be isolated, there probably is only maybe at most a hundred or two that get used to send this junk out, out of 20,000 or so.
Where are the people at who are looking for solutions for this?
It's very hard to do these things because some of them are contacting mining pools off band.
Preventing them to do so is virtually impossible
yeah, so the only way is a hard fork that disallows transactions of some set of criteria.
Bitcoin has strayed a long way from being a monetary ledger.
That's almost impossible to pull it off, damaging to the community and I don't think can work either.
One could always come up with ways to encode arbitrary data on the Blockchain.
The thing is that those ways will become uneconomical soon, so I am not worried too much.
A tx size limitation that is weakly enforced would be a start, eventually the lack of support for big ones would amplify the size cost of work-arounds on newer branches could be closed up once a minority of miners are running them. It is possible to discover which nodes are originating these blocks containing inscriptions.
When I say "amplify the size" i mean by forcing multiple transaction overhead on the transactions to chunk the inscriptions out.
A gentle approach could work, and it would steadily increase the latency of propagation of competing blocks that would otherwise reorg, to favor the ones with no or less big transactions.