It has 0%, ZERO, effect unless 100%, ONE HUNDRED PERCENT, of nodes have the same policy. The only way to guarantee 100% of nodes have the same policy is by CONCENSOUS. otherwise everyone can run knots and the individual that wants a monkey jpeg will run a node that will hold it in their mempool and they will offer enough to a miner to confirm it in the next block. Do you get that?
Discussion
Please send 100 sats to this address then:
bc1qmn37k6axqqmx75pg2pw3cj6l8pphwy6zgs0v7c
You prevented yourself from receiving Bitcoin... That's not the same as preventing someone else from receiving Bitcoin... How do you not understand that? Of course you can prevent someone from sending to you...
I can make it harder and more expensive tho and that’s the whole point.
It's not any harder or any more expensive... That's what you fail to grasp... There is nothing about mempool policy that changes how expensive or likely a block is to be verified.
When are you gonna post that tx id to prove your point?
In the meantime I’ll leave this here:
https://primal.net/e/nevent1qqsga52844jhzzytpc5056h34wckklgv83z9e2puyqjk2c6eg4m4fuqty0wem
You can do it yourself. You don't have to use someone elses service... You can do it for the free market fee rate. Just because a service exists that charges more to do it for you doesn't mean doing it costs more.
No, I want you to do it. Don’t worry, I’ll zap you the 100 sats right now.
You're mixing up what I said. I mean you can submit a tx with a large OP return without using the bot supertestnet is referring to. Just because they charge you double doesn't mean it costs double... It means it cost double if you want someone else to do it for you.
Ok, do it then. Send me the 100 sats to the SegWit address. It will probably cost you 30 cents to pay a miner. I zapped you the 100 sats and I’ll zap you the fee too if it’s around 3 sats/vByte. All I ask is to demonstrate us all via tx id in a block explorer that that this non-standard tx can get confirmed in the next few blocks at a normal fee rate. Then I’ll give up and admit that filters don’t work.
I would have to fork and run my own implementation without the dust filter... Which I could do but I'm not going to to prove my point. That would take too much of my time and is not worth the I told you so...
Nice try lying, bud. I saw what you did before you deleted it. You claimed you sent me 100 sats, but in reality, you sent 547 - just one sat above the dust limit to sneak it through. That’s not what I asked for, and you know it. Thanks for proving my point.
Sure, you could run a custom fork without a dust limit if you’re really that determined—but that’s like saying you can break into a house if you try hard enough. Doesn’t mean people stop locking their doors.
Before I realized myself. Don't worry... I'm compiling libre right now so I can do it.
Still proving my point. Glad I made you work for it. đź«‚
I think the point is if there is demand for something, people will do it... The first person will have an obstacle yes. You are right there. But after the work is done once, it's trivial for anyone else.
You’re right to a degree. If there’s demand for something, people will find a way to do it. There’s a huge incentive to steal: it’s 100% profit. People use all kinds of tools and services to protect their property, but a skilled and determined thief can still get through. Does that stop people from building fences, buying vaults, or paying for home security?
That’s why filters while not perfect are still useful. They’ve never been a silver bullet against spam, in Bitcoin or anywhere else. But with regular upkeep, they’re good enough. What matters most is the will to fight spam, not surrender to it. I’m not trying to block every last piece of spam - just enough to make a difference. The more, the better.
I just don't think it's a good analogy. Since the filters don't stop spam on Bitcoin. They block spam in the memory (RAM) of your PC
If that was true, you’d be able to send that 100 sats without Libre.
libre is Bitcoin though...
Ok…
Actually I might be able to do it on core anyways. I just know the default is gone with libre. Regardless I got it going. Tested and working. Took me half a day most of the time was compiling libre. A little setup.
Here is my test tx. Now do you you want me to send one to you to prove I can? Or can we not bloat the utxo set more?
Sub sat fee rate?
Yea. I should have done a bit more... But the mempool is nearly empty anyways so perhaps I'll go through.
It wasn't uncommon to see sub sat fees before ordinals.
Just not going to reply to this one?
You are right, there is not a 100% chance of it not happening if 100% of the nodes don't have the filtering but the percentage that blocks mined by a miner that do not conform with the nodes' rules get rejected and becomes an orphan block go up as the number of nodes validating that block based on those rules goes up. We don't need 100% of the nodes to have spam filtering, we just need that minimum critical mass where there is a strong chance that orphan blocks are created - which should start incentivizing miners to comply a bit more with the more restrictive parameters to avoid loosing all their effort in an orphan block.