“Filters work.” — Matt Hill of nostr:npub126ntw5mnermmj0znhjhgdk8lh2af72sm8qfzq48umdlnhaj9kuns3le9ll
https://video.nostr.build/9c3a8c514679d02beb0800f5e6d2add3f1e0d1cdcc8e378a86145cf29ebcb08f.mp4
Discussion
Preach it!
But "intruders" can just send directly to a miner, incentivicing miners to create their own mempools, which is already a thing..
Did you watch the full video?
He didn’t or he just likes to gaslight.
Nothing said in the video contradicts what he said - miners can also choose whatever node implementation they like to communicate with and if the mine a block, their node gets to decide on the filters.
This block then becomes part of the chain and every filtering node out there has to store it and accept it as valid, regardless of what the owner believes is spam.
Did you watch the full video?
I did? Personal mempool rules (filters) do nothing to stop miners from adding whatever txs they want up until the block limit because they mine them.
It's not spam as they pay for more blockspace. Higher fees will be welcomed by smaller/solo miners, also everyone working on L2s/L3s.
I wonder if that's a good thing, what do you say?
im not gonna write an article because im about to sleep.
just, make sure you watch the video.
make sure to watch mechanic's videos on his own yt channel. he explains stuff really well.
then read what you just said again.
everything you said answered many times by others, and even in this video.
but maybe it just flies over without context idk. so maybe watch mechanic's videos as well.
but even then i think some people doesn't focus on important parts of the videos, or miss the points idk.
not trying anymore, tired.
This is logical If the goal is to reduce mempool memory usage. But the intention seems to be to keep these blocks off the chain, and filters fail to do that. Instead they create two different mempools, one of which makes miners more money. Node runners end up with the same chain bloat, and open nodes are now second tier template sources
Let the nodes decide.
Who said the nodes can't decide? What you're advocating for is not in the nodes' best interests.
But am I biased: I run an rpi node
Core says the nodes cannot decide. they removed the option.
Exactly. Let nodes configure as they wish, as they historically have been able to.
That's an entitled view. How else should core allow nodes to misconfigure themselves? Nodes are welcome to run whatever code they like, just as Core is allowed to write whatever they like.
That's a separate issue from what I had said, which is that adding filters beyond consensus to mempool doesn't accomplish the stated goals, and is ultimately harmful to node operators
You asked the question, "Who said the nodes can't decide?" I answered you with the fact that Core turned off filters and removed the option to turn them on.
Therefore, Core says nodes cannot decide. Clear and simple.
Clearly he’s one of the gaslighters.
Throwing mud doesn't make your arguments any better. Mempool filters reduce memory usage, but have no effect on block sizes. Only changes to consensus can do that
So?
Mempool is small compared to the chain. Small nodes aren't running out of memory, they're running out of disk space
This has nothing to do with the reasons why aggressive filtering should be the norm.
If it isn't the mempool size, and it isn't the chain size, presumably it's censorship. But if you'd like to actually say what you're alluding to that would be easier than me guessing
lol if you’re locking your front door, then that’s censorship too
Limiting OP_RETURN is as effective as locking your door and leaving the windows open
Actually, it’s effective as locking the door and closing all the windows too. A motivated thief will still find a way to break into the house but most people will simply not try to enter.
Watch Mechanic on the What Bitcoin Did podcast. He perfectly explains the contradictions the spammers hold on to without knowing.
I've done a little research to understand the OP_RETURN situation and so far, this is the stance I've taken.
This is very well put
I think we need to establish the best way to keep bitcoin as freedom store of value first. Notaries, currencies, gifs as second priority yes/no? Financial beneficiaries or business ideas will always advocate for better filters not saying this is the case. Good to hear all sides of this story but we already have the matrix money we need the alternative.
Good post. I like Matt.
Thank you for sharing my podcast!
That’s basically what the FixTheFilters people were saying for the past two years. We got gaslighted and ridiculed for it. It took pretty long time for other Bitcoiners to wake up to this, which is kinda concerning.
💯
WATCH!
Make spam harder, not easier. Make it more expensive, not cheaper.
nevent1qqsw6sahjlvfndn96qw7tkzc5s4z5un0jnrfsylkvl02vunvkrz9segpzfmhxue69uhk7enxvd5xz6tw9ec82csc7cgs4
At the core of the why *filters work* is that the COST (time/money) is the ultimate filter. "how are u going to find the miner for your non-standard transaction" + "oh its $80, no thanks".
Exactly.
This is why the fee market competion for transaction finality will be the best, most neutral, longterm uncorruptible filter.
Standardness filters set by a group or groups (even honest, well meaning humans) can be influenced/corrupted.
+
Where is the line? Who decides on the parameters of the filters? Protecting bitcoin by being really really smart about filters is not a neutral sustainable approach.
Non financial uses will be priced out or they will compete - long term - and be able to afford the fees because they provide real sustainable value
The Monkey JPEGers and most (all?) non-money data storage bros will run out of cash. I will out work them and will out bid them in the fee market.
🌍🧑🚀🔫🧑🚀