I'm not in a moral panic. I just think there's no such thing as spam because spam is subjective. If it should be fixed, it should be fixed and th PR can merge.
The shitcoiners are using Bitcoin as their money for their shitcoins... Doesn't bother me one bit. 🤷🏻
Who is Satoshi? Nothing wrong with Bitcoins privacy.
Gimmie love ❣️ #music #tunestr
https://music.youtube.com/watch?v=_m6Gg9c3FMQ&si=_EMi10W6tUhALauO
The uproar over nostr:npub1qtvl2em0llpnnllffhat8zltugwwz97x79gfmxfz4qk52n6zpk3qq87dze filtering what they consider to be transaction spam reminds me very much of when people were raging at Primal for filtering Semisol out of the trending feed.
In both cases, my take was the same: you can use a different client, and you can mine to a different pool.
#Bitcoin and #Nostr are both open protocols.
If you don't like what Ocean is doing, then don't give them your hashpower. If you agree that ordinals are transaction spam, you should point your hashpower to this pool.
Also, FWIW, it appears that whirlpool transactions were simply caught up in this filtering as an Innocent bystander due to their OP_RETURN byte size. 🤷
Not saying you shouldn't express your views on Nostr. Rage away if you want to and try to change other's minds about it if you feel compelled to. But more importantly, vote with your hashpower. 💪🫡
The uproar over nostr:npub1qtvl2em0llpnnllffhat8zltugwwz97x79gfmxfz4qk52n6zpk3qq87dze filtering what they consider to be transaction spam reminds me very much of when people were raging at Primal for filtering Semisol out of the trending feed.
In both cases, my take was the same: you can use a different client, and you can mine to a different pool.
#Bitcoin and #Nostr are both open protocols.
If you don't like what Ocean is doing, then don't give them your hashpower. If you agree that ordinals are transaction spam, you should point your hashpower to this pool.
Also, FWIW, it appears that whirlpool transactions were simply caught up in this filtering as an Innocent bystander due to their OP_RETURN byte size. 🤷
Not saying you shouldn't express your views on Nostr. Rage away if you want to and try to change other's minds about it if you feel compelled to. But more importantly, vote with your hashpower. 💪🫡
Agreed.
Most inscriptions probably are scams. But that's your opinion as you said. No one's telling you how to use Bitcoin. No one's telling you , your transactions aren't valid. But you're more than willing to tell other people theirs aren't. The fact that you immediately paint your opposition as pro inscriptions is very telling. I don't care about them at all. My position is neutral. If they're paying miners to run scams, they will run out of Bitcoin if they're not actually using it to be productive. There is no reason to intervene.
I said to stop them. Not to filter them on your personal node.
I understand the difference just fine. You can configure your code to filter these transactions all you want but they are legitimate transactions and whether you censor them or not, they will be able validated by nodes unless you create a fork. That's my point. The only way to stop them, which is what Luke suggests as he says they're exploitative, is to hard fork or uasf.
Plebs should not lend their Hash to pools that censor transactions.
No nostr link at the bottom of page? Need to know more about this recovery.
Yes and if you configure your Bitcoin Core to have more than 21 million coins you will not be in consensus with anyone else running a Bitcoin Core node and instead be running a shitcoin node.
The recent discussions and negative sentiment surrounding the potential
filtering of
nostr:npub1qtvl2em0llpnnllffhat8zltugwwz97x79gfmxfz4qk52n6zpk3qq87dze and
coinjoin transactions appear to be driven primarily by speculation and
misunderstandings of how complicated spam filtering has historically been.
Filtering spam over the past two plus decades has consistently been a delicate
dance between accuracy and false positives, requiring ongoing adaptation and
refinement of filtering algorithms. This same principle applies to the potential
filtering of spam Bitcoin transactions.
Combating spam is a continuous and ever-evolving endeavor, similar to a
never-ending cat and mouse game. The notion of creating a static filter and
abandoning it is unrealistic. Constant adjustments and updates are necessary to
maintain their effectiveness. This situation is no different, and future
challenges will inevitably arise. When they do, we must question the situations
and infrom those running the application, mining pool, etc. of the potential
issues. By collaborating and openly sharing information, we can develop
solutions that address spam while safeguarding legitimate transactions and
privacy focused transactions.
Simply put: Have you ever encountered the frustration of searching for an
important email only to discover it buried in your spam folder? How did you fix
that? You instructed your email client to no longer flag those types of emails
as spam or you added the email sender to a safe sender list. Sometimes, this
worked right away and other times this took additional tweaking of spam
filtering algorithms. Still, this is so much easier than it used to be. Back in
the day, you'd have to send that email along with the headers to someone like me
and then I'd have to go update the SpamAssassin filters that I wrote.
I'm hopeful that they'll work it out.
A transaction that follows consensus is not spam. Spam is subjective and there shouldn't be any censorship of any transaction period. If you would like to "filter" this "spam" , fork off or get everyone to agree to change Core.
Yes exactly.
The "spammers" are paying exorbitant fees to those securing the network. They will find out eventually when they run out of money. Spam is a subjective term anyway. So is value...
