The core issue isn’t the technical efficacy of filters but the precedent they set for censorship within the Bitcoin network. When nodes or miners begin filtering transactions—be it JPEGs, Ordinals, or others—they’re making subjective decisions about what constitutes “spam.” This subjectivity opens the door to broader censorship, as evidenced by instances where mining pools like F2Pool filtered transactions linked to OFAC-sanctioned addresses .

These actions undermine Bitcoin’s foundational principle of neutrality. If certain transactions can be excluded based on content or origin, it challenges the idea of a permissionless and decentralized network. Moreover, these filters can be circumvented through backchannel deals with miners, leading to a less transparent and more centralized system.

In essence, censorship by another name is still censorship. While filters may reduce unwanted data, they also pave the way for discretionary censorship, threatening the very ethos of Bitcoin’s open and decentralized nature.

Bitcoin is for protecting things you might hate. No exceptions.