Replying to Avatar Lyn Alden

One of the things that I find most troubling is audience capture.

People who work in corporations have to toe the party line. But then people who go “independent” often get captured by the most vocal parts of their audience. They often just get paid to rebel against whatever they left, and become as much one-sided as they previously were.

In its most benign state, many people with audiences will just not comment on certain things. They fear their audience. There is no positive ROI in it. When asked point blank, they will try to deflect. In the worst state, they will actively and consciously deceive, playing to their audience.

I can’t promise I will always be right on things. Sometimes I will be wrong.

But what I will promise is that I will always tell it like I see it. So when people agree or disagree with me, my goal is that at least they know it’s genuine.

I aggressively resist audience and platform capture.

I started talking about US fiscal deficits being the key macro issue to watch in the first Trump term. Then for four years during the Biden term I amplified it and started the “nothing stops this (fiscal) train” meme.

When Trump became president again, and Musk talked about specific deficit reductions by 2026, I re-iterated my view that they will fail, and that the deficits will continue.

When I was talking about deficits during the Biden term, I got a ton of comments saying I was too right wing. But they were in the minority vs those who found value in the commentary. And it was right. And then during the early Trump term I got a wave of critics saying I was some liberal. But I said it’s just math, your guy is wrong too like the prior guy, so I say it like it is.

When Musk took over Twitter I was cautiously optimistic at first, but then I pointed out that the platform was increasing its rate of censoring Indian and Turkish posts compared to prior management at the behest of their governments that are also potential rocket and car buyers. They did this while simultaneously broadcasting themselves as the new free speech platform in the US. I took heat for pointing this out on his own platform but I felt it important to do so. These various knee-jerk social movements are so shallow.

I am wealthy enough to not need income anymore, but purposely am not so high-up in anything that I have a gazillion employees that could get rekt if I don’t bend the knee to some asshole. I run a profitable, lean, wholly owned company by me, and have some additional partnerships.

I don’t take that middle ground lightly. People more hardcore than me chose not to take it. Too many employees eat because of those leaders. Meanwhile, I use time to analyze whatever it is I’m looking at.

The latest event is bitcoin spam.

Some folks want to increase the expressivity of bitcoin to put more spam in there. I disagree with that.

Other folks are mad at the spam that’s already in there, and want to censor it. I disagree with that approach too.

Many influencers are afraid to even wade into the debate and tell you their opinion.

I’m happy to talk and reply. Not that it really matters, but in case you care, since most of this is on social media anyway and I haven’t pushed anything hard and broad yet but have watched and analyzed it.

My first article on bitcoin in 2017 was interested but not committed. After Bitcoin’s price stagnated for several years and went through the blocksize war, my second article was strongly bullish. I basically said to buy the fuck out of this thing. It proved itself to have a dominant network effect and to be antifragile.

We are up 16x since then; and I’m still bullish. I don’t view any of the attacks as existential. I fade all of the moral panics that I currently see.

The JPEG attacks are weak, the token attacks are weak, etc. All of this is from 2 years ago and still weak now. NFTs and memecoins are weak as fuck.

Fees are low because16 years into Bitcoin’s existence, it is still less than 1% of Fedwire transfer volumes. And it’s normal to be low until Bitcoin cash balances rival gold’s or Fedwire’s at even 10%.

Part of why I am bullish is because until Bitcoin has another10x and becomes a common cash balance at scale, it will remain a niche spending unit.

I don’t agree that everything is good for Bitcoin. However, I am 90% there.

Everything that fails to break Bitcoin is good for Bitcoin. I am bullish on Bitcoin, having witnessed yet another attack crash upon its shores.

For those that are concerned about spam, I would 1) remind you of the existing blocksize limit, 2) point out that UTXO bloat is not occurring since the fad went out and Runes launched, and 3) few of the existing proponents represent permanent fixes.

Bitcoin can withstand this weak sauce. That’s why I bought it in the first place.

Lyn, the core friction isn’t chain size; it’s what happens **before** data becomes part of a 4 MB block.

Every transaction, big or small, has to be relayed across the mesh first. When the mempool is quiet, the fee floor drops so a single user can push megabytes of OP_RETURN data for pocket change. Every full node must download, verify, and store that data in real time. Block size governs long-term storage after confirmation but does not limit the instantaneous relay load or the CPU cycles spent validating the burst.

An 80-byte OP_RETURN never enters the UTXO set, so it doesn’t bloat that live database. A larger OP_RETURN still skips the UTXO, yet the node must parse and hash the extra kilobytes during validation. All archival nodes keep the raw bytes forever. Pruned nodes can delete the old block file later, but they still pay the one-time relay and verification cost on the way in and will serve the data to any peer doing initial sync.

That’s where the legal angle appears. A capped OP_RETURN forces an illicit file to be chopped into thousands of random shards; with no cap, the entire image or PDF rides in one recognizable chunk. Archival nodes then hold a plain-text copy of contraband; even pruned nodes re-transmit it on demand. Storage is predictable; liability is not.

Leaving a modest default ceiling—and keeping the `—datacarriersize` knob—lets anyone who values permanence still get data on-chain by slicing or paying extra. Node operators focused on monetary validation aren’t obliged to relay every jumbo payload or risk hosting a completely illegal file. That keeps the network neutral without silently loading the bandwidth and legal cost onto the smallest peers.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Great post! I agree 💯

Migrating my nodes to Knots because I don't want junk in my mempools and I don't like being told how I should set up my nodes.

It's not about censorship, it's about freedom of choice and a profound dislike for any bs🐸

Is anyone going to post Proof of Spam?

Increasing the OP_RETURN limit will *decrease* UTXO spam though. If you want to maintain the current functionality, you need to show there is a lot of 80 ~ 160 byte OP_RETURN spam that the filters are currently keeping out

The problem isn’t 80 B vs 160 B spam; it’s multi-hundred-byte outputs that masquerade as spendable.

Solving that doesn’t require handing the network an eight kB fire hose.

But the change is only a mempool policy change. So they'll still get in, and when nodes don't have these txs already, they will have to download and relay potentially entire blocks immediately on them being mined.. Also they are currently bloating utxo set. Which will overtime increase system requirements to run a Node.. If you want to make real change, it'd need to be a consensus change.

I totally agree! The fake pub keys are next on node runners' radar. This War has just begun. The op_return is only the first battle.

Can’t nodes accept but not relay transactions that are non standard ?

IMHO Lyn point still stands: UTXO bloat concerns are likley overblown. Longview: Non-monetary or monetary adjacent "blobs" will eventually get priced out. The scammers, spammers will pay, then pay, the pay again .... forever. They will all run dry. Fees are the most neutral uncoruptible filtering method. Nonmonetary data blobs will have to bring real longstanding value, to clear the bitcoin NGU hurdle rate. If a usecase outcompetes the base monetary value then it means humans really value it. Doubt this is true for monkey jpegs, runes, rare sats, but never say never 🤣