Avatar
josie
e76450df94f84c1c0b71677a45d75b7918f0b786113c2d038e6ab8841b99f276
mostly hominid; bitcoin core dev

a few of the one off > 80% blocks are fascinating. single transactions paying something like 285 bitcoin in fees. mostly like someone creating a transaction by hand and forgetting to add the change output 😅

lol both of them did. but that’s not the point.

the point is your argument is that we should be making judgements about what is a legitimate use of bitcoin OUTSIDE of the rules of consensus, to make sure people are “using bitcoin in line with its intended purpose.”

i fundamentally disagree with that.

been seeing folks claim “this is the first time fees are more than subsidy, etc” so i decided to check:

it’s not.

which nostr android client should i be recommending to people?

your hypothetical are comparing apples to oranges. you keep referencing malicious transactions that would break consensus rules we have in place today. what im talking about are transactions which stay within consensus rules but are for a use case that you don’t like (fwiw, that i don’t like it either).

go back to your original post and replace “bullshit jpegs” with “terrorist non-OFAC compliant” and see if your argument changes. it doesn’t.

Replying to Avatar Guy Swann

It's not about whether it's "in their right" or not. The content of the chain is not arbitrary or something that is divine as long as its natural and pays a fee. Ultimately this is software and an open, adversarial network that needs to be robust. DoS and spam are the ultimate issue of all open networks.

If someone figured out a way to make 1,000,000 unspendable UTXOs in a single transaction or just a handful of blocks are were happily willing to pay those fees while creating a huge, immediate jump in the amount of RAM every node had to have to stay in sync, despite not a single one of them having any monetary use or relation whatsoever, would you consider that "valid" and perfectly fine? If you did, then I would argue that you and I disagree on both the purpose and engineering concerns of the network.

Bitcoin is like a giant, trustless clock, that has no alternative. To stamp a bunch of bullshit images and shitcoins into it is like grabbing a precious time keeping device and using it to hammer a nail. Its dumb, doesn't even work very well, and is directly at odds with why the device is so valuable in the first place. This is *not* about who is willing to pay a fee, this is about the purpose of the network and whether the bloat of data is at odds with the very fundamental value that #Bitcoin provides. This is about the tragedy of the commons putting costs on those who maintain the network, by people who don't even give a shit about the value that the network provides.

the fact that people are able to mine these transactions, even if you hate them, means #bitcoin is working as intended.

I THINK YOU MEANT TO SAY AN ATAC ON BITCOIN SER

this is the way nostr:note1adx3tjzq0th32w9xewmlgqrmy7g7qauq8xh4zlkyvc7wn6aes35qkc7l0e

magical that i can bitcoin instantly to people on nostr while fees to get in the next block keep climbing.

we still got tons of work to do, but damn, it’s nice to see the progress 😁

nice, gonna do some reading on how the protocol works and play around with it. would be a huge win if possible

had a shower thought the other day: how hard would it be to implement the signal protocol for nostr DMs? iirc, punkt m02 phone implemented the protocol in a custom client called pigeon

man, quite literally the worst. get well soon 🫂