Others might need to hear this, since we're seeing a flood of abusive comments directed at Knots users here on nostr. All these npubs just woke up in the last few days and have been everywhere saying 1) stuff that's wrong, and 2) abusive language to people who are basically just here out of principle. I saw one note earlier about "moralizing bitcoin" - sorry, what? Oh you're just here for number go up, not the revolution. Fuck off, take your fiat gains, pay your taxes, and quit shitting in the pool.
Discussion
It reminds me of when Israel attacked Gaza (the latest time). Remember all those npubs that suddenly appeared, supporting Israel? They were all fairly similar - a picture of a person wearing a suit, with a kind of "evangelical" look about them. All just woke up started debating people here. If you didn't notice it, then please start noticing... This is what an influence operation looks like. We're seeing the same thing again with npubs supporting Core. Obviously there's an agenda. Where are those pro Israel npubs now? Have you seen any activity from them recently? No. They were here on a job. Same now. Same pattern, like there's a playbook or something.
I also noticed a random burst of new BS on this subject in my feed, which is why I weighed in.
I was also wondering why this is big again when blocks are already empty. Are we worried about the security budget or not?
Personally I'm quite happy with empty blocks. I'd like fees to be higher, but I'm also never not gonna ninja in my 1 sat/vbyte tx, which I was quite proud of back when fees were actually kinda high a while back.
It started because people recently extrapolated what 100KB of contiguous data could be used for and having to decrypt that data to verify the transaction's validity would likely trigger anti-virus software labeling Core as "malicious content." Inscripting data is one thing because you'd have to reassemble the data using a certain specialized compiler. With 100KB contiguous, the bytes would be more or less in plain text, any image or video compiler could view the data natively.
THAT is why people are getting upset. There is a very REAL chance that random strangers will send you, let's call it "bad stuff", that according to current law makes you a fed target. And outside that is disgusting to most people.
This is why I never argued about the merits of OP_RETURN it's really just about property rights. My computer, my software, my rules. Want to make my node a CP magnet? No thanks, I'll run something else.
This PR linked solves the problem for every encoding attackers can invent unlike the treadmill of chasing new filters. It also works in a safe way for you, because all data is deniable always.
A attacker can invent a new way around the filters and post CP as the first TX using that method. No way to defend it because the only way to close every hole is to stop accepting new transactions at all. Because of that filters cannot and will not ever protect you from CP being stored in your chain state.
Step back and remember, the proposed filtering is authoritarian control over bitcoin transactions. Think of the children + we must do something, this is something, we must do this. Classic government marketing for new authoritarian bullshit.
I am aware of that PR, as of yet that is not in the build and is a theoretical fix to that on a deniability basis. Again though, bitcoin is a monetary network and the claim that the thing hindering a robust layer 2 is the size of the OP_RETURN field, is dubious at best. By my estimation therea not a single need for the datacarrier size to be over 100 bytea even in the most complex layer 2s I've seen.
Now minting a shitcoin on bitcoin however takes much more data. I am less concerned with the "Think of the children" wrapping paper than the "Limiting arbitrary data is authoritarian" wrap. It is smuggling so many intended consequences I haven't even thought of the unintended ones.
This just seems like a better argument. Massive respect for both of y'all.
