Replying to Avatar GrumpyGardener

So, can talk about this high fee environment and how it's effectively creating the same mobility issue as gold? Did Rune do this, because it's effectively an attack on the network. If that's true, then the what are the proposed solutions?

I've heard people talk about spam filters for the network, but isn't that effectively censoring transaxrions? If we start censoring transactions, then maybe someone can help me understand from a technical aspect, how this censorship-resistant asset stays censorship free... while we begin to censor?

#Bitcoin #WTF
Avatar
21seasons 1y ago

Censoring tx's is fiat mindset

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Avatar
GrumpyGardener 1y ago

agreed. it destroys the whole principle of what we're doing here. I don't know enough about the base layer or how we got to where we are, but it's my understanding (and I could be very wrong) that Taproot opened the door to these shenanigans.

Do you know the history here or how we got here?

Avatar
21seasons 1y ago

No, there have been these same possibilities since the beginning, usability and scalability of arbitrary data in the chain was already discussed in 2011 in bitcointalk forum and abandoned in 2012. Since them there have been multiple times it was tried. Omni, Counterparty, RGB etc. It nothing new under the #Bitcoin sun.

Avatar
21seasons 1y ago

Segwit and taproot have only made it a bit cheaper to add data onchain