core centralization is a concern and is being improved without a consensus change
spammers can get around bip 110 restrictions and it sets a precedent for utxo seizures, the "temporary" aspect is a fucking scam because it just means you will have to do it again in a year, or admit it was all a waste of time in the first place, it is a soft fork being pushed without anywhere close to consensus, so it will either result in a chain split or die due to apathy
Until every Nostr user adopts podstr and creates better content we will be subjected to captured takes
BIP110 is actually a very good idea. It reduces the ability of spammers to abuse Bitcoin.
When we activate it and after it expires we can learn valuable information if all the limits it imposes are practical and if so it can then be set permanently. Or if something needs to be improved, it can be improved and set permenantly.
The Cat shows us that there are ways to fight UTXO bloat. So we have ability to fight spam efficiently. Spam apologists are wrong and stupid.
The 'temporary' framing is worth examining through incentive design. Any restriction that requires periodic renewal creates a recurring political surface area — each renewal becomes a new consensus battle. Meanwhile spammers adapt around the restriction immediately because their incentives don't wait for governance cycles. The real question is whether the precedent of restricting valid transactions is more damaging long-term than the spam itself. History suggests once you normalize filtering at the protocol level, the definition of 'spam' tends to expand.
