Thereās certainly an argument to be made for whether itās possible or the cost required to prevent or deter it. But the idea that because it paid a fee āit valid and you have to accept it as legitimate use of Bitcoinā is just illogical nonsense, imo.
Discussion
So who is deciding what's a legitimate use?
The dictionary:
ledger
noun
ledĀ·āger
a) a book containing accounts to which debits and credits are posted from books of original entry
b) a digital record that is used similarly to an accounting ledger (as for maintaining a list of transactions)
Note that it doesn't say anything about "a collection of drawings or art".
It would be ok to include the transactions about the buying or selling of drawings, nothing is against that, but not the drawings themselves, which is separate data that obviously doesn't belong to the ledger itself. The reasonable thing would be to include the link in the memo of the entry, and the art being distributed elsewhere. Nobody in their right mind draws inside the ledger itself. Do you imagine you sell the Monalisa and instead of just entering "selling of the Monalisa", you actually draw the Monalisa in the ledger??? š š
Yes future minister of spam filtering. You define which binary is good and not to your liking.
Bitcoin is money. So it would be explicitly monetary transactions. A picture of a monkey is clearly not monetary data. š¤·š»āāļø
I agree.
So to feed the crickets. 'Spam' by the definition of team knots is deemed to be not a legitimate use even if a sufficient fee is paid. Maybe the council of not legitimate use will decide if my tx is allowed, by their moral standards of course. Sounds statist as fuck. Same vibes.
Maybe youāre trying to stick your transaction into the wrong chain.
Filtering the *kind* of transaction is and always has been explicitly necessary. If you think itās censorship, then congratulations, youāve used a censored network from the very moment you found Bitcoin.
There are a plethora of ācensorshipā including of course the OP_RETURN limit thatās been in place for more than a decade. As well as strict transaction formatting, op code/sig ordering, explicit relationships required between the components, I mean you could go on for hours or days with all the stuff thatās not allowed in a Bitcoin transaction. Iām curious why you are so accepting of this censorship, but if someone suggests that pictures of dicks should filtered, suddenly you seem to have a serious problem with it? š¤·š»āāļø
I think the cult around a not very well proved client implementation seems a bit odd.
We'll find out if this a setup for the next bearmarket and if drama around will manifest.
And I think it is retarded to store pictures on the time chain. But even sstoshi did store his white paper here so filtering how to use and what to store seems hypocritical too. Even if I know that the fiat side will try *everything* to slow down this train. And their main tool is to create problems and provide 'the solution'. So here are some bells ringin, too.
So I will just wait and see how this, seemingly, battle of the greater war will turn out.
And if bitcoin should fail then it wasn't good enough and the fiateers are what they pretend to be - almighty.
Just for the record, Satoshi did not store the whitepaper on the timechain. And if you are meaning his timestamp in the genesis block, it wasnāt op_return or a modified witness or anything, it was in the input script. This is a place thatās explicitly customizable by the miner and doesnāt cause any UTXO bloat or modify any purpose of any field, but uses it for the very thing itās designed for.
Others have embedded the whitepaper on chain. But this was well after Satoshiās era.
Relay policy/nonstandardness efforts are NOT NEUTRAL. They can be CORRUPTED/INFLUENCED.
FEES on the other hand will be neutral and ultimately be more resistant to influence.
Perhaps Bitcoin Core has arrived at a rough concensus that this is true and is *asking* the community to take on the filtering.
Have you ever worried that the op return limit thatās been in place for like 12 years was going to turn into censorship of certain people from spending their BTC? š¤
Well, how do you decide on the number of bytes? 40? 80? Maybe the close friend of an OG Core dev has a business that 80 is bad, but 83 works? Do you just say why not 85, *it doesn't matter that much*. Point is that Core or Knots devs or whoever has the mantle can be subtle influenced. Not true with fees as the filter - much more neutral and ultimately fair. Core does not want to be in charge of filtering. Let the community deal with it - which seems to be whats starting to happen