The culture is deteriorating because of custodial bitcoin- ETFs, MSTR, and Michael Saylor.
It has nothing to do with Ordinals and JPEGs.
Discussion
Monetary use case is the culture. No?
I care more about self-custody and keeping full nodes accessible.
I don’t care what goes in blocks, as long as the size is limited. If monetary transactions want to be included, you have to outbid other use cases.
“I don’t care what goes in blocks”
That’s what exactly why I think the culture is deteriorating in the first place.
Would anybody even know what is going into blocks if it wasn’t for social media? Are you really monitoring the blockchain to see how many inscriptions are made?
This is all manufactured drama.
If no one care why do we have this drama/ discussion?
Social consensus matters.
We have this drama because a group of people led by Bitcoin Mechanic, Luke, and Matt Kratter have been brigading a GitHub repo to block a sensible change to Bitcoin Core.
You think you’re defending bitcoin, but you’re actually attacking it, and you don’t have the humility to engage in some self-reflection to realize that.
I could be wrong on technical things of course.
But what’s wrong to advocate for Bitcoin is money and not just a database
and at least have a gut to fight against spammers?
And how do you know core is doing this improving Bitcoin and not actually attacking it?
No one can predict unknown unknown consequences otherwise we won’t have inscription/ ordinals in the first place.
I suggest we should do nothing. But it’s core who want to push the update without social consensus.
These kind of attitudes are unacceptable
You’re not fighting spammers.
You’re incentivizing them to put their “spam” in a MORE harmful place and instead of a less harmful place.
I know Bitcoin Core is making the right decision because their reasoning is better than Mechanic, Luke and Matt Kratter.
But your side are just stirring up a bunch of useless drama, in essence sybil attacking the consensus process.
Also, treating Bitcoin Core like a uniform group isn’t how it actually works.
Core devs each have their own opinions, and code only gets merged if it has consensus amongst a large majority.
Mechanic and his allies were suspended because they were spamming this discussion, even though their concerns were addressed (multiple times) and they aren’t even contributors to the Core process.
I’m referring to consensus with the community, not within their group.
Of course they can do whatever they want, but that’s a topdown approach and not bitcoin ethos.
Plus Antoine sitting down and calling Citrea “User” and noderunners “enthusiasts” also worries me
💯 this
If you care about nodes being accessible why are you in favour of making them less accessible to people?
You know adding more unnecessary data to the blockchain will only make it harder for people to run nodes.