"IT IS FILTERING NOT CENSORSHIP"
Y'ALL GETTING YOUR DOUBLE SPEAK STYLE TALKING POINTS FROM THE US TREASURY?
Discussion
BASED
I don't believe a configurable parameter on a node is censorship.
Hilarious analogy though š¤£š¤£
āCENSORSHIP IS TRANSITORYā
You are saying "#Bitcoin is censorship". It is meaninless, pointless.
nostr:note17g0efeag6gs486mjdsylgpar3f87u0s94u4s5svu8rfr6xa9rnksthda3t
I oppose all censorship, but ordinals are exploiting a bug. They would not normally be there. So, if they fix the bug, is that censorship?
Thatās how I see it too. Ordinals shouldnāt even be a thing. But since they are a thing, all I can do is not give a shit if someoneās censoring them or paying billions of seats for them. Either way, let them
#Ocean #mining doing good job. Somebody must come up sooner or later with spam filter and there is obviously spam in mempool. Even the āspamāās author admits itās spam but better spam as brc than erc, it has its purpose i guess and time will show ā¦. and shitcoiners will bleed out ā¦
But if there is also filtered hash power for pure #bitcoin TXs only and more decentralized at the same time, i am ok with it. Itās good for us, bitcoiners not shitcoiners, i also accept #mempool block space as the public space. So we can have like more kinds of hash and fx.hash at the same time ā¦ market and demand will decide this.
Are you guys arguing on Twitter parallel to Nostr or is this a Nostr exclusive debate?
THATāS THE LANGUAGE OF THE SUITS.
Isn't proof-of-work itself a spam filtering mechanism
Wait, are you in favor of Ordinals?
NOPE
Whoever mines the block can filter, censor, discriminate all he wants.
The miner canāt force people to stop inscribing subjective spam on the chain, and the degens canāt force the miners to include their spam on their block. Itās beautiful if you ask me.
Economic incentives only go so far.
Do you consider an email spam filter censorship?
It's definitely censorship, but here's some food for thought:
If they simply deprioritised the txs they didn't like but would include them if the mempool was empty, is that censorship or just natural selection the same way miners prioritise high fee txs, while others might prioritise their friends' txs.
Also, Bitcoin is censorship resistant, individual miners were never supposed to be censorship resistant. Stop panicking and let game theory play out.
This is such a normie take.
What financial txns are being censored or filtered exactly?
Censorship is targeted at specific content. Filtering by an arbitrary metric like size is not.
NVK apparently disagrees strongly. Heās making jokes on Twitter about it. I donāt understand this space, and Iām beginning to question some things.
Odell and many others are conflating node configurable rules with censorship.
One miner filters tx with more than 42 bytes in op_return, some consider this censorship. However, Bitcoin Core by default filters tx with more than 80 bytes, but those same people do not consider that censorship. However, I am "censored" from sending tx with 100 bytes in op_return.
Another nice example: Nostr relays filtering p*rn or shitcoin talk are also not considered censorship for these people. But filtering spam from the mempool somehow is. And I think we all agree that storing dickbutt pictures on the chain is not the purpose of Bitcoin (p2p electronic cash system) which makes it spam.
And I thought #Bitcoin is censorship resistant š
So what's the real problem here?
Humans that want to censor others or the assumption that Bitcoin actually is not censorship resistant?
Where are all the people with "Bitcoin does not need you" or "Bitcoin does not give a shit about xyz" or "Fix the money, fix the world".
Today In see more fear instead of hope or confidence.
Stay Humble & Stack Sats
#Bitcoin fixes this!
