Nostr Web Client

perhaps the term "address" is not a good one. An address is not some bucket that collects bitcoin. An address is simply a way for you to access a UTXO in the future using your private key. You put an address in a transaction to "send the bitcoin to" but it doesn't. It just creates a UTXO with that address inside which then later allows you to spend that UTXO using a private key that relates to that address. You cannot spam an address, you can only spam the UTXO set with unspendable garbage.

I strongly suggest you study bitcoin and not by asking questions on nostr but by actually studying how bitcoin works. I cannot explain it to you in this format, it's complicated.

oobiyou 1y ago

Thank you for taking the time to explain. So you can spam the UTXO set with unspendable garbage. Could this have any negative implacations for the controller of the UTXO set?

example: a UTXO tied to the runes protocol containing data that the entity who controls the UTXO set does not align with.

After doing some research, it seems runes are relatively easy to burn, but still incurr tx fees to do so. And I’m unsure if just transacting them as small UTXO’s during something like consolidation would be sufficient.

I will continue to study the endless 🐇🕳️ that is bitcoin; but I have also learned a lot on nostr and will continue to ask questions I cannot find answers to. Thanks again!

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

BitcoinStu 1y ago

There is no "controller of the utxo set". A utxo has an address in it and is not "owned" or "controlled" by anyone. You can spend that UTXO if you can sign a transaction with a key that hashes to that address.

The UTXO set is shared by every node running on the bitcoin network. It's all of them, every single one.

oobiyou 1y ago

I understand what you are saying, but I’m not sure if you understand what I am saying. My ignorance is likely to be the issue here. If I FAAFO on it, I’ll report back.

BitcoinStu 1y ago

spamming the UTXO set is absolutely bad for the network because it requires every single node running on the network to maintain that set. This drives up the minimum hardware required to run a node and validate the network, which increases the cost of validation.

oobiyou 1y ago

I agree. My original question (while stated incorrectly?) was:

Is spamming a UTXO set tied to a specific address something to be concerned about. You don’t think anybody has a UTXO set though.

If I have the keys to spend a certain number of UTXO’s, couldn’t I consider those mine?

BitcoinStu 1y ago

yes if you have the keys that match an address is several UTXO's those can be considered "yours" but they are really just some random UTXO's in the set that happen to have an address in them, for which you have a key that can match

BitcoinStu 1y ago

spam in the utxo set has really nothing to do with the addresses in those spam utxo's.. other than the fact that they can be used as inputs by someone with the key

oobiyou 1y ago

And if that address is known to the public; a corporate address, or a public figure for instance, couldn’t that address then have data which it would not like to be associated with now tied to their address, with the only way to rid themselves of association with the data being to spend the UTXO?

BitcoinStu 1y ago

If you send something illegal to a public mailing address, does anyone associate that material with the owner of the address? No. It's the sender associated with it, not the recipient.

Also the utxo is spendable, it just doesn't make economic sense to spend it. Remember that a transaction can have multiple utxo's as inputs so you could add a 1-sat utxo as one of multiple inputs and that would spend it.... not that it would matter.

BitcoinStu 1y ago

so to answer your question directly, no. No one is going to give a shit if you send a bunch of inscriptions to a known address. That doesn't associate the owner of the address with any spam you send them.

oobiyou 1y ago

Wow. Thank you so much for engaging in this dialogue with me, I learned a lot. 💜🫂💜

I don’t know if I necessarily agree with you that nobody would care; especially given how much authorities/others care about what address BITCOIN (UTXO’s) is sent to. Being set up in the mail is not unheard of. Perhaps the publicly distributed nature of the ledger would guard against this. I’d have to think about that one a little more deeply.

BitcoinStu 1y ago

if someone creates a spam utxo that happens to have your address it in, that's meaningless.