The thing is that a change on your nodes mempool policy changes noting. You will get the transaction either way when the block is mined because they are valid no matter what your mempool policy says.
So the complete discussion is stupid because no matter what your nodes mempool does. The network doesn’t care
Incorrect. Nodes broadcast the transactions to the mempool/ miners. That’s the whole point for a node network all running the software in consensus. Think of it this way, when Bitcoin is double spent, or the data of a transaction is too high, it won’t be picked up by then nodes, and broadcasted to the mempool. And it will not be included in the block once it’s mined.
Same goes for spam filters. My private instance of the mempool could be vastly different from the public one at .space, because of the filters I’ve set. Some transactions simply don’t exist on my instance because of my parameters. If I was able to mine that block myself, those transactions that I have filtered out will not exist in that block.
I can send a transaction directly to a miner or mine transactions myself. So your mempool policy is completely useless! The only thing you will get with such bullshit is that people are sending transactions directly to miners.
Are you referring to MARA’s slip stream? You pay them thousands of dollars for them to use their hash rate to only include your large data set/ transaction, enough to fill an entire block if you want. It’s using their nodes block template to be selective of certain “transactions” and then using the full force of their hash rate to mine that block with their set filters. There’s actually no guarantee that the block will be mined believe it or not. It’s also the exact equivalent to what I’m trying to explain. I have a a spam filter, they take money to filter everything but spam. The same but very different. I also only have 5 TH backing my template haha. But if I were to mine a block, there wouldn’t be any more than 83kb of data per transaction for my block.
So all in all, my argument is that Core decided to remove my ability to filter what transactions my node sees. That’s why I switched to Knots.
Exactly, your node only accepts the transaction in the mempool. So in a high fee market your own mempool can become useless when it comes to calculating fees because you only see half of the transactions.
And switching to knots changes only your mempool settings. It doesn’t changes what others see and what other minds put in their block templates. So at the end you will get the transactions either way because they are valid even in the eyes of a knots node.
So the whole discussion is completely stupid and useless because a different setting on your side changes nothing.
You can already mine transactions with larger data than 83kb today 🤷🏼♂️
Yeah I think we’re just going in circles at this point. If every node ran knots with spam filters, and only broadcasted monetary transactions to the mempool, spam would never be included in the block. Those spam transaction wouldn’t exist for a miner to mine. That scenario would never happen unfortunately. Especially when it’s pretty clear that the core developers and large mining companies are only interested in profit and shareholder value. At the end of the day it was incredibly simple to switch my node from core to knots. I just won’t support software that thinks removing features is better for the network at the cost of my storage and node power. I heard an interesting contrast the other day, just because burglars are armed with a hammer to smash the glass out of your windows, doesn’t mean you don’t lock your doors anyways. Don’t ever say it’s pointless to try and filter spam, it’s not. My instance of Bitcoin will never recognize jpegs on the blockchain, and I’m happy with that.
I find it extremely funny that you don’t understand that it doesn’t matter how many nodes run with Knots. It only takes one miner to break away from your censorship and do things differently.
You don’t understand that it’s much more lucrative for miners to allow data than to leave it out.
For you, the additional data changes absolutely nothing! The blockchain grows at a maximum of 4MB every 10 minutes, and if you don’t want the OP_Return data, just delete it.
What you’re forgetting in your obsession with blocking “spam” is that if you prevent one method, people will find new ways to integrate data into the blockchain. These methods already exist, and they’re even more inefficient—and suddenly, they can no longer be pruned.
So have fun fighting this pointless ideological battle. My node will never block transactions, and my miners will always allow data.
I fear this is the beginning of the end. I hope one day we’re not arguing over if bitcoin should move to proof of stake, and larger blocks again so we can cram more pointless scam tokens into bitcoin. “It’s pointless to do proof of work, we can mint tokens so much faster through PoS, what’s it matter they’ll be minted anyway since we removed the guardrails. And let’s just up the block size too. What’s it matter? It’s pointless the blockchain will be huge eventually, let’s just bump up the size now and cut to the chase, we can sell me ordinal tokens!”
I find it extremely funny that a protocol was made for monetary transactions and you think it’s alright to spam and bloat the process, even welcome it. What’s the end goal here? Mint as much garbage tokens and ordinals to sell overpriced UTXOs to weak minded individuals with deep pockets, and VCs and crypto firms get rich? And you cheer that on? They make money and tell you it’s pointless to filter their spam and you lap that up?
I’m all for individuals being individuals and self sovereignty. That’s why I became a part of this community. But I’ll stand up for the integrity of this project when developers and VCs start making actual software changes for me “in my best interest.” Think who benefits the most from these changes. What is the point of putting non transactional data on the block chain? Just because you can, you should be able to permanently alter software code that’s run by the majority of the nodes? That’s shady at best, I’m picking sides.
I’m for individuals being individuals and self sovereignty, but I want to decide how people have to use Bitcoin 😂😂😂😂
Who is benefiting from the change?! No one, because nothing has changed, but I think you are not able to understand that 🤷🏼♂️
So have fun running knots and doing your thing. I will definitely not say others how to use bitcoin. That’s the difference between both of us.
I do see the duality by the way, and something I am conflicted with. However I stand by my statement that bitcoin is money for enemies. I don’t care if my enemy uses bitcoin for money. I do care if anyone uses bitcoin to put a picture of a pizza on the blockchain and take up space on my node forever. I guess that is where we’re different.
