âSir, we found CSAM in the blockchain.â
âCHILD PORNOGRAPHY IN OP_RETURNS!? Track down every node IP, locate their physical address, and send in the SWAT teams immediately!!â
âItâs actually in Inscriptions.â
âOh, never mind then.â
Discussion
Inscription spam is possible because compromised Core devs allowed it.
They rejcted Luke's fix.
They now use it as excuse for more spam on OP_RETURN.
Are you doing the same thing?
Lukeâs âfixâ wouldnât have fixed it, which is also why it was rejected.
BS. It is fixed in Bitcoin Knots.
Why do you thing inscription spammers are worried about thight mempool policies?
If itâs fixed in Bitcoin Knots, and you can run Bitcoin Knots, you should be happy. Are you happy?
Oh, we have a hardcore gaslighter here I see.
We don't need changes to level one unless it's not functioning as intended. The onus is on you to prove changes are needed.
Describe to me how the Bitcoin network is currently failing to work properly as the worlds hardest money and how your fix will return it to normal function.
I'll wait.
Thereâs currently a malincentive for some class of users to bloat the UTXO set by embedding data in fake pubkeys. This could over time make it unnecessarily costly to run nodes, harming decentralization and thereby potentially Bitcoin itself.
Increasing the OP_RETURN relay limit takes away this malincentive.
Youâre welcome :)
Perfect. Exactly what I expected.
"This could over time" - those are the key words right there.
Here is what you don't get:
We will not accept changes to layer one based on some vague theory about something that might go wrong someday for some unknown 'class of user' who may eventually show up.
You make changes to layer one ONLY when absolutely necessary.
You're gaslighting. Go find something better to do with your time. Bitcoin doesn't need your theories. It needs people like you to leave it the hell alone.
So in your view we should not anticipate, and only act when itâs already too late.
Ok yeah disagree.
But the good news is you donât have to upgrade if you donât want to! :)
So thereâs no middle ground for you?
Youâre saying we must act on potential problems nowâbefore they existâbecause once we see them, itâll be too late?
No.
You anticipate problems, draft possible solutions, and keep them ready. If an issue actually emerges, the community reaches consensus and implements the best fix.
What youâre proposing is gaslightingâa trojan horse for more âfixesâ to problems that donât exist.
The good news? Iâm running Knotsâa real solution to a real problem: a rogue core team trying to strong-arm and gaslight the network into compliance.
Youâre solving nothing. Thereâs no problem to fix. Either focus on real issues or find hypothetical ones that actually matter.
> core team trying to strong-arm
How? :)
By trying to force changes to the software that a massive portion of the community vehemently disagrees with. They have not proven these changes will help, and they have not addressed the potential problems the changes may cause.
What they propose involves philosophical changes to fix potential problems that do not exist at this time.
We don't need that on layer one. We need to leave layer one alone until actual problems begin to surface.
What's your take on the ~1500 unreviewed commits that Luke forces on Knots users? And how do you even know what's in these committs?
"Iâm running Knotsâa real solution to a real problem" đđđ
What's the problem?
These are not potential problems. We already saw this play out during a spam hype in 2015. Spammers moved to fake key outputs, which lead to unnecessary permanent bloat utxo set bloat. It is likely that such a cycle will occur again that it happened three times already now.
Just a hint. The "class of users that bloat the UTXO set" are the bad actor Citrea.
So their bad action bloating the UTXO is excused to blaot the OP_RETURN by compromised Core devs, instead to fix the root cause.
That is what Aaron don't tell you.
Some more info on Citrea here
glad to see more reasonable takes on nostr than the shitshow that is X