No clue how @npub1qtvl2em0llpnnllffhat8zltugwwz97x79gfmxfz4qk52n6zpk3qq87dze can sell itself on a platform of "transparency" and "bringing censorship-resistance back to Bitcoin" when this is how they approach things.

Can't think of a more disappointing Bitcoin launch in recent memory. Maybe community pushback will make them rethink their approach, but I can't sit by and watch this unfold without calling out this BS.

https://nostrcheck.me/media/public/57f54acce26acba03282480936f7b055452c28fe0d80001376e127b48e9906cd.webp

https://nostrcheck.me/media/public/288026b002e71c2faa76ee64b7795141e98ade94b157412beb7cecc4b50b9b11.webp

https://nostrcheck.me/media/public/4409358f1bcb29e0964a07352a26e1b1cc32796a29cb212e4c5ce3eafd41f57b.webp

https://nostrcheck.me/media/public/8dde889e9227e7ad1d2c6479504ed24e000dc70880d20e5a1845ef81e98ddcf3.webp

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

I don't know if it's bacause that website uses cloudflare proxy and didn't allow Tor users without the captcha, or because of the format, bit my Amethist doesn't open any of your images :/

Same

While I totally understand your argument and agree that filtering OP_FALSE is indeed censorship, aren't all miners censoring to some degree? When a miner includes their own transactions at 0 sat/vb in a block aren't they censoring someone else who paid a fee? Inscriptions will still be picked up by other mining pools in subsequent blocks. Granted that example isn't as wholesale as filtering a class of transactions that play by the rules, so it is worrisome.

I think we should let it cook and just appreciate the fact that we have a new pool in the mix. That's a good thing and I hope that with Stratum V2 eventually the individual miners paying for the hash will have more of a voice as to what's included in a block.

Perhaps this will be a change that will yield benefits down the road. I'm going to stay hopeful for now with nostr:npub1qtvl2em0llpnnllffhat8zltugwwz97x79gfmxfz4qk52n6zpk3qq87dze and appreciate y'all digging into the details for awareness as to how things are operating at the moment.

🤞🤙

P.S. fuck ordinals I don't like them but they do fall within consensus.

The issue is Scale. Running a betting pool at work and not including the entire country in your facebook group, is not censorship.

Three states banning a certain minority race from participating in the lottery is.

Pools are large entities that some feel have too much legal liability and weight in securing the network. The proposed solution and the people proposing it, are censors.

Also...fuck ordinals...

Look at the players involved. I’m more surprised anyone would be surprised.

Playbook "maxi" scam. Overpromise on decentralization, openness, censorship resistance and self custody.

Result: censor transactions right from the getgo, closed source, custodial.

But it has all the hype and bitcoin shillfluencers behind it, so it must be good!

nostr:nevent1qqsrtzrnlzvek4x369gfd35w4wr30cyuu8rd88zt2hjaa5g690q6gxqpzemhxue69uhhsmtj9e6hxetwdaehgu3wdaexwq3qtr4dstaptd2sp98h7hlysp8qle6mw7wmauhfkgz3rmxdd8ndprusxpqqqqqqzaw3hgq

Seems like very few care.

Memes about water are more important right now.

This is a power move.

Ricepirate reference!

Calling Miner extracted value "off-band payments" is a linguistic attack.

They have just admitted that their major argument against Drivechain and Bip300/1 is already a native aspect of bitcoin, they want to chamge miner incentives, but not admit their hypocrasy and preference for their own projects.

Corruption.

nostr:npub1s33sw6y2p8kpz2t8avz5feu2n6yvfr6swykrnm2frletd7spnt5qew252p haven’t seen your video today yet, but would love to see a 2nd video on Ocean pool going through these concerns. Seems to be very early and already censoring transactions

It's BS, and we need to stop giving Jack a free pass