I can understand this opinion. I disagree with it, but I understand it. Bitcoin was never intended for arbitrary data storage like this, but these transactions are, in fact, valid.
I don't understand the opinion that these transactions are equally good as monetary transactions, or that the right course of action to respond to these transactions is to actively make them easier to perform. That's not neutral.
There was arbitrary data embedded in blocks since the beginning.
Aside from that, there’s consensus code and there’s no consensus code. Any transaction that falls within the parameters of consensus code is valid. End of discussion.
That doesn't mean that the purpose of Bitcoin was to be an arbitrary data storage medium. And just because something is valid does not mean it was intended, nor that it is good (for the health of the network).
Censorship is not good for Bitcoin either.
Whatever you and I think about a valid transaction is completely irrelevant.
It's not censorship if it's not mandated. Optionality is not censorship. Individuals choosing not to relay or mine certain transactions isn't censorship.
You show me one UTXO moving from one public address to another? All good, I don't care where it's from or where it's going. Show me a monkey JPEG on chain? I'm not relaying or mining that.
