there is an excellent technical reason to bring up CSAM: it is a clear example of why spam is harmful, which is a principle tenet in the fight against it. Very often our ideological opponents say "there is nothing WRONG with spam" (e.g. here: nostr:nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzqf42cz6fz5vk4t22w8hrqdpe7verglllzesnjzv7yh5jchhc0k2eqy88wumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmv9uq32amnwvaz7tmjv4kxz7fwv3sk6atn9e5k7tcqyr4s0ts4kgrntp8wq2e8wsavnpang24mcedypzpdz9aseul4n6x5svpncsk) or issue challenges like "you can't DEFINE spam" (e.g. here: https://x.com/L0RINC/status/1967404819716694518)
CSAM is an obvious way to counter these statements/challenges
And there is no way to get there but a think of the children?
It is an argument designed to destroy rational thought about the problem. Literally 101 how to make the other person reactionary instead of reasoning. It also makes you reactionary instead of reasoning.
There is a problem to solve, let's both of us turn off half our brains and devolve into ideological demagogues. That always helps.
> And there is no way to get there but a think of the children?
It is a fast way there, and efficiency is very usefl
> It is an argument designed to destroy rational thought
Rather, it is an argument to focus it
I can't tell by the level of discourse here by you and others that it definitely has not done anything to improve the technical quality of the discourse.
Not one answer for the fact that I keep posting that knots real solution is that they are making Cloudflare scanning a defacto part of Bitcoin by insisting on a solution that makes all large op_returns MARA and trusting their scanning slipstream submissions. (I'll admit I don't know for sure who they are using but the principle is the same about trusting a 3rd party black box especially proven by us not even knowing whose closed source solution they use)
Not one answer when I posted about how ocean, datum, and knots are the best way to put CSAM on chain before core 30.
Even you who I used to respect for quality technical posting about lightning are posting a multi day emotional blast without any technicals.
We all need to do better and be better. Help me start us down that path instead of being a part of the problem.
> Not one answer for the fact that I keep posting that knots real solution is that they are making Cloudflare scanning a defacto part of Bitcoin by insisting on a solution that makes all large op_returns MARA and trusting their scanning slipstream submissions
The knots solution does not make *any* large op_returns MARA
The knots solution simply filters large op_returns from your own mempool
If a spammer therefore submits the large op_return to MARA that is not knots' fault, and if MARA mines it, that too is not knots' fault
> ocean, datum, and knots are the best way to put CSAM on chain before core 30
How so? I am not familiar with this claim
Slipstream is a path right around knots. Knots has 0 ability to keep CSAM out of the chain. That means what knots is really counting on to keep CSAM off chain is whatever screening method MARA uses for slipstream.
The mempool only thing is a dodge to avoid facing the real problem. If it gets on chain by any path every node has to serve that block from that day to the end of bitcoin. Mempool is not a real solution to the real risk.
I am the only one I have seen put together this claim. Here it is.
I like how you are still dancing around the topic, refusing to address it. Pathetic human being.
What dancing? My entire argument is that knots humpers need to knock of their victory lap because they have not solved the problem.
Your knots node is gonna serve the same CSAM block content as core for all eternity. Somehow I'm the pathetic human being for wanting that fixed instead of joining the cult? Fuck all the way off.
What's this solution you suddenly have that's better than the option to use filters?
You never mentioned anything of the sort before. You're so full of shit.
And this argument was about mempool policy. You're not even worth talking to with how you evade.
You are evading the very real issue of serving block content by bragging about your mempool. A transient problem with a bandaid but a permanent problem remains.
Maybe you should have read what I wrote in this thread at least before calling names. You are wrong to say I didn't say that and anyone who can read can see you didn't bother.
I'm not a dev but I can see the problem. As long as knots fanboys are celebrating solving a problem they haven't solved and core devs don't GAF no one is even looking or trying to find a real solution.
So I bust my ass trying to raise the issue and all I get is morons on both sides calling me names and dodging the issue.
Knots proposed and has implemented a solution to rate limited Ordinals. Spam is a cat and mouse game you have to fight on the mempool level, to not drift towards censorship.
I think it's valid to say that the quantity of spam on the chain is a relevant factor and if we can reduce 99% of that it's a good outcome. It makes a difference if the network makes an effort to reduce this behavior or if it opens itself up to it with all guards down.
I didn't say I solved the goddamn problem in any kind of final way. This issue is about mempool sovereignty. It is NOT about a complete solution to spam. Core are being intellectually dishonest and subverting mempool sovereignty, so that takes precedence in the goals of the clued in and responsible among us Knots fans. I never claimed to have all of the answers. You are probably projecting your own arrogance or grouping me in with people I have little in common with.
A real solution to the problem is secondary to the immediate threat that is posed by Core's bullshit. You would be wise to actually engage intellectually with individuals like myself. I have given you the same consideration you gave me, and then some. You can go on assuming bad faith, or you can grow the fuck up and realize there's more to people's goals than just trying to shut you up. It's not all about you. I happen to have very serious reasons to prioritize what I do, but I am open to discussing long term solutions for later down the line, like a consensus change.
