Autonomy and Sovereignty. This is like asking what is the point of locking your door? A burglar will just break a window to get in. The point is it's my house and I can choose who I LET in, but if someone breaks in I can't really stop that. Spam in the block is a break in. Spam in my mempool is who I LET in.
Discussion
Consensus rules let them in regardless. Relay policy is like having a feather as a deadbolt
Why are the majority of op_returns under 80B then?
Wasn't the filter limit set based on what was being used at the time?
“Filters do nothing”
“We must remove this filter”
Why do we have to make this change to core ?/why not leave it alone ?
What is the risk of keeping that dead code? Right now the risk of removeing the dead code is more people running knots.
Lol, dead code is when a function is called and has a deprecated feature. This is a feature that still gets called to define the standardness of a transaction. Dead code...pfft repeat things you hear some more, dude.
This is disingenuous. The code wasn't doing nothing. Most OP_RETURNs were less than 80kbs for a reason.
Because it creates bad incentives, if relaying OP_RETURN transactions is hard, people who want to inscript will bloat your UTXO set. You will be able to do nothing about it, whereas now you ignore everything after OP_RETURN even if it's part of the block.
Technicalities aside, as a node runner, it is good or bad for me to have to store arbitrary data on my my node?
It’s like the 2 sides are arguing at crossed purposes:
core = you can’t stop it so why try
Knots = it shouldn’t be there because that’s not what the protocol was intended for.
But as a pleb node runner is it better or worse for me that the data carrier size is gone?🤷 Feels worse but IDK
This is how lots of us feel nostr:nprofile1qqsr9cvzwc652r4m83d86ykplrnm9dg5gwdvzzn8ameanlvut35wy3gpz3mhxw309aex2mrp0yhx5c34x5hxxmmd9uqsuamnwvaz7tmwdaejumr0dshszythwden5te0dehhxarj9ekxzmny9u0ljp2l and are trying to get to first principles as to why this arbitrary data, in this format and size, is even on Bitcoin to begin with? 🤔
Shouldn't the main Devs be working to make BTC the best "money"?
If so, then they need to explain why it's *good* to encourage and be OK with people sending jpegs of cats to my node. 🫠
Is that what their best iteration of money is?
I believe data is representative and what it represents matters. Very sharply.
Bloating nodes with rando spam, opposed to financial transX data (sender, receiver, sat amount, fee) seems counterintuitive to the whole project's intent.
Is money just 'jump ball' to whomever wants to pay a miner the fee to push whatever they want to the entire network?
If it takes changing concensus to get rid of such spam, then perhaps we deserve a better "money".
Am I wrong? 🤷♂️
Or is not wanting random jpegs on my money censorship?
What even is Bitcoin to become? 👾
I always seem to find more people to follow during these exchanges.
#bitcoin
#lightning
#runknots
#mynodemychoice
#noderunners
#choosewisely
#thinkdifferent
Haha. Hey man. Don't hold me to it. I'm just trying to make my way thru the weeds to figure out what I think Bitcoin ought to be...
I guess people like the feather. We should keep our feather for now. Why remove it?
because its virtue signalling
If it's not broken don't fix it. Too many times in my experience people have said, this thing on the machine does nothing let's remove it... Then eveything is fine for a little while until the machine does a special cycle and crashes bc that thing was a limit dog for the special cycle.
Why is core so emphatic about removing this ?
i’ve already answered this 6 times, so i am going to stop wasting my time now
I think people are reading this as:
- there’s a spam problem
- there’s a weak filter mechanism in place
- proposing to replace the weak filter with nothing means “admitting defeat”/don’t care
I have no blockchain experience under my belt but while the core argument is technically sound I can see why people would react the way they are.
I think this is mostly a communication problem.