Nostr Web Client

I can understand this opinion. I disagree with it, but I understand it. Bitcoin was never intended for arbitrary data storage like this, but these transactions are, in fact, valid.

I don't understand the opinion that these transactions are equally good as monetary transactions, or that the right course of action to respond to these transactions is to actively make them easier to perform. That's not neutral.

paulo 4mo ago

There was arbitrary data embedded in blocks since the beginning.

Aside from that, there’s consensus code and there’s no consensus code. Any transaction that falls within the parameters of consensus code is valid. End of discussion.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Luke de Wolf 4mo ago

That doesn't mean that the purpose of Bitcoin was to be an arbitrary data storage medium. And just because something is valid does not mean it was intended, nor that it is good (for the health of the network).

paulo 4mo ago

Censorship is not good for Bitcoin either.

Whatever you and I think about a valid transaction is completely irrelevant.

Luke de Wolf 4mo ago

It's not censorship if it's not mandated. Optionality is not censorship. Individuals choosing not to relay or mine certain transactions isn't censorship.

You show me one UTXO moving from one public address to another? All good, I don't care where it's from or where it's going. Show me a monkey JPEG on chain? I'm not relaying or mining that.

paulo 4mo ago

I personally object to any transactions regarding the SBR and would like those transactions invalidated. And sent to an address I control if possible.

Luke de Wolf 4mo ago

Well, I was being serious, anyway. Enjoy the rest of your day! I don't think we're getting anywhere.

paulo 4mo ago

Have a good day, Luke 🫂