Subnostr

I think you have a false idea of what knots does.. knots is completely agnostic to what a transaction contains. It simply sets a limit on the SIZE of the transaction.

The best money in the world doesn't need to be a file storage service to be money..

Digital Nomad 1d ago

I know what Knots is, I was apart of that crowd. The implementation isn't the problem, its the people in the knots camp who are the problem.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

ThymeKeeper 1d ago

I can't really speak for everyone in a community, but running BIP110 is the only (current) option for anyone who disagrees with what Core did.

I really don't want my node to be file storage for people who aren't using Bitcoin as money.

I'm happy storing any any all monetary transactions, but arbitrary files that are unrelated to monetary transfer? Absolutely not

We used to be able to manage this through policy, but Core removed that, so consensus is our only practical option at the moment

Stirling Forge 1d ago

My consistent argument for why I choose knots and am leaning pro-110 is because spam is also a form of censorship, with a much larger area of collateral damage than what Knots proposes. This one transaction below highlights that you can censor MANY transactions with one abuse of the inscription bug, easily. If people are arguing that limiting this type of transaction is censorship, then I'm arguing it actually frees up room for thousands of real people to transact. It's objectively spam and before Core 30 was thought of as so. I never called core people pedophiles or hopped on board the "legal argument" train. I just think the direction regarding spam that core has gone and miners have gone, is bad for bitcoin and more people should consider we can put an end to it if we get together on this issue.