would adding confidential transactions to bitcoin mitigate spam?
Discussion
What exactly is spam on bitcoin?
dont feel like arguing definitions, in this case lets go with non monetary transactions
Non-monetary transactions do not belong. #BitcoinIsMoney
Iām not here to argue semantics ā just to clarify a few things.
Spam on Bitcoin has always meant something pretty specific:
transactions designed to clog the network, avoid fees, or disrupt normal usage.
Ordinals donāt do that.
They use standard Bitcoin transactions.
They pay full fees up front when inscribed ā and again when sold or transferred.
They feed miners, help build the fee market, and actually reinforce Bitcoinās long-term security.
So putting all ānon-monetary dataā in the same category as spam doesnāt really hold up.
Bitcoin is evolving ā and with it, our definition of money is too.
People are already using Bitcoin not just for payments,
but to anchor truth, culture, and proof ā all timestamped, immutable, and paid for.
Thatās not misuse.
Thatās exactly what Bitcoin was built to support:
permissionless innovation, with real skin in the game.
Bitcoin isnāt just currency anymore.
Itās a full monetary protocol.
And that opens up a lot more than we imagined at the start.
This is my take on it.
This made me ponder Simplicity and what it would enable.
Start with (relentlessly) preaching knots & nostr:nprofile1qqsq9k04vahllseell55m74n3047y88pzlr0z5yany32st29fapqmgsppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qy08wumn8ghj7mn0wd68yttsw43zuam9d3kx7unyv4ezumn9wshsm60rnh and shaming the shit out of spammers and commie devs first.
That might actually do a lot to mitigate spam than confidential txs.
which devs are commies?
how does ocean stop spam?
By not picking up garbage through Datum?
individual miners running datum choose which transactions are included in the blocks they mine
they can choose to mine spam
You are right. However it seems like if you are Ocean miner you most likely are not mining spam and Datum is helpful for that purpose. Ocean rather than just a pool seems to be an idea. Idea evolving around Bitcoin mining decentalization and Bitcoin as monetary network.
Maybe Iām wrong but this is how I see it, so why not to preach that?
They _can_, but there's no good reason they _would_. They also have the freedom to _not_ mine the spam, unlike with other pools that force them to do so.
And can't comprehend why Odell choose to expose himself with arguments so so flat.
ocean blocks has the best health if you are measuring it by spam
Damn. nostr:nprofile1qqsqfjg4mth7uwp307nng3z2em3ep2pxnljczzezg8j7dhf58ha7ejgprfmhxue69uhhxetwv35hgtnwdaekvmrpwfjjucm0d5hszxthwden5te0wpex2mtfw4kjuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgtcpzamhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgtcqsjag4 too
What am I missing. Where are we headed?
š¤
I feel crazy.
Do you see any issue with the changes to default op_return settings in v30?
personally i think core maintainers should have left the default unchanged and if node operators wanted to increase it manually they could
i also think node operators should have more options, in general, one of the reasons i donate my time to building out opensats
all that said, i do not think changing the default will ākill bitcoinā or represents a major change to the network, these transactions are valid and being confirmed regardless, lots of fear peddling that is unproductive
What about knowing the real reason behind the change?
That makes sense. I am not generally someone who enjoys peddling fear. And I do not think it will break bitcoin.
I do wonder what will change with this update though. Seems like there are potential consequences that people are ignoring.
And I feel like there is a lot of gas lighting which is a red flag for me.
You are asking too many wrong questions
Did I say that you can STOP spam?
Moreover, open bitcoin core repository on GitHub and check how someone with opposing view got banned by core devs in the past.
You probably know all of these way better than me but you just don't want to accept it.
OCEAN enables miners to use their own updated spam filters. The other pools force them to use obsolete and buggy Core ones.
Its true. Im doing it now.
Help is out, nostr:nprofile1qqsqfjg4mth7uwp307nng3z2em3ep2pxnljczzezg8j7dhf58ha7ejgprfmhxue69uhhxetwv35hgtnwdaekvmrpwfjjucm0d5hszxthwden5te0wpex2mtfw4kjuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgtcpzamhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgtcqsjag4
As a default! Try to filter that
if it's confidential we won't even know whether it was spam transaction or financial transaction ? š¤·š¾āāļø whdo at you think?
too much overhead - risking decentralization
Mimble wimble time finally?
Spammers gonna spam.
Bitchat??
only because there'd be no blockspace left š
Would make txs much bigger
would probably increase mining centralization but would reduce protocol level censorship risk due to better privacy
Stop funding infiltrated core developers.
we are not
all opensats grants are listed on our website
Seems like it
I don't see an issue.
First fix the taproot hack. Start removing garbage from bitcoin first, then we can think about adding stuff to it.
is there a pull request you have in mind
As far as I understand, nostr:nprofile1qqs0m40g76hqmwqhhc9hrk3qfxxpsp5k3k9xgk24nsjf7v305u6xffcpzfmhxue69uhkummnw3ezucn4d9kxgtcpzdmhxue69uhk7enxvd5xz6tw9ec82c3034qnnm made one multiple times and it was rejected by core Devs. However I havenāt seen it with my own eyes, but I trust nostr:nprofile1qqs8fl79rnpsz5x00xmvkvtd8g2u7ve2k2dr3lkfadyy4v24r4k3s4spz9mhxue69uhkummnw3ezuamfdejj7qg4waehxw309aex2mrp0yhxgctdw4eju6t09uea5z4g and nostr:nprofile1qqsggcc8dz9qnmq399n7kp2yu79fazxy3ag8ztpea4y3lu4klgqe46qpz9mhxue69uhkummnw3ezumrpdejz7qg5waehxw309ahx7um5wghxutt5dyhx6ef0m5rx92 that were talking about it multiple times luz
They might indirectly limit spam by making txs bigger and heavier, but fees are still the real deterrent.
CT would be awesome. Not sure if it mitigates spam tho.
Longtime question from regular freak - what's the best way to ensure UTXO privacy, coinjoin? Send to lightening that back on chain?