People who think we need to change bitcoin so that we don't give governments an excuse to target node operators have missed the entire point of bitcoin.
Discussion
- Know yourself and your enemy
- Plan and prepare
- Observe and adapt
Agreed
which side of the argument are you on? it seems like both core and knotts could be implicated by your statement
Both sides are retarded.
I think it definitely implicates both core and knotts:
core v30 is the change.
All current nodes filter op-return by default- so your statement is illogical
My statement is completely logical regardless of the current thing.
Ok so your statement is completely unrelated and does not insinuate anything at all?
Give me a fucking break dude.
Reverse the change
There's a lot of talk about governments using CSAM to target node operators, that's what I'm referring to.
You're talking about mempool filters. I don't care what mempool filters you run on your node.
Well then my original rely that your statement is illogical applies!
Avoiding the potential situation where governments are more able to target nodes for csam, requires only that we continue as-is. Maintain the status quo.
It is Core that is proposing the change that *might* make csam problem worse.
Knots is not “changing Bitcoin” to avoid government liabilities- as you suggest erroneously!
Core is changing Bitcoin default policy and it might increase government liabilities, and I actually don’t think it’s debatable, it absolutely will increase liability due to the plain text format in op_return per-confirmation.
You should, because filters protect the network from attacks. Not perfectly, of course. But bitcoin works best if everyone does their bit.
Why would an attacker pay 4x more fees?
We could’ve stopped inscriptions too if core merged Luke’s patch but they didn’t because it was “too controversial”
You know all this so you are just gaslighting us trying to trick less technical users. Fuck you.
I dont think he's gaslighting. Certainly some folks adjacent are. Perhaps the net effect may be similar. But even a cursory look around will tell you that Bitcoin's attackers have deep pockets and are willing to use any kind of FUD against it.
Look at his original post again.
This guy is insinuating that somebody wants to “change Bitcoin” because they are scared of the csam/government legal issue.
So he is saying Core is changing the filter policy because they are scared of the government?
Or is he gaslighting people into thinking “switching to knots” means they are changing something?
The status quo is filters, knots continues the status quo.
Core wants to change the status quo- and they are acting like complete assholes because people disagree with them.
Oh yeah, the gaslighting is acting like it's Knots that's trying to change Bitcoin.
I haven't ever said anything like that, that's your own interpretation.
What I have observed is a large number of people saying that we need filters to prevent CSAM because the State could use that against node operators.
Luke himself has mentioned CSAM multiple times.
There are also a huge number of people who think that this is a fork, which is misinformation.
The issue of CSAM being embedded in a blockchain's OP_RETURN field creates a potent political attack vector against decentralization.
The argument, often voiced by figures like Luke Dashjr and aligning with Nick Szabo's security philosophy, is based on two facts:
Immutability: Once illegal data (even a hash or link) is in a block, every archival node operator must permanently download, store, and transmit it.
Criminal Liability: This technical necessity exposes node operators to the threat of legal action for possession and distribution of CSAM.
This threat is the key centralizing force. Individuals and hobbyists quit running nodes to avoid legal risk, leaving the network to well-funded corporate miners and centralized pools. These large entities then introduce censorship filters to comply with regulations, undermining the network's permissionless nature and forcing a shift toward centralization. The law is weaponized against the infrastructure.
Filters aren't going to stop the State from putting CSAM into a block and using it as a pretext to come after node operators. It's not going to stop any of the other pretexts they could use either.
Fundamentally either bitcoin or the state as we know it can survive, not both. There will be a showdown at some point, and node operators could well end up lined up against the wall and shot (CSAM or not).