“…all the fluctuations in the market… should be studied as if they were the result of one man’s operations.”
-wyckoff-
Understand the Operator.
nostr:npub1c0rnyyhmdnvg6xkvrrmgf8rxp3r28jtjhad8vmze8rgxf87aed7qlltlvg last night was 🔥
Bitcoin, Africa, 9/11, George Soros, JFK, Docker. What else did I miss?
nostr:npub1yx6pjypd4r7qh2gysjhvjd9l2km6hnm4amdnjyjw3467fy05rf0qfp7kza nostr:npub1jv3tmy30yrr0ek0fzdz5wfanh0pdp947fqgewyz44qndmg75ev9sz7lakg nostr:npub12zqf55l7l9vsg5f6ssx5pq4f9dzu6hcmnepkm8ftj25fecy379jqkq99h8 nostr:npub18pudjhdhhp2v8gxnkttt00um729nv93tuepjda2jrwn3eua5tf5s80a699 nostr:npub1x3n9jcp54npw2l6scvewdvy47jhvj30706u783nu2hktu6a8gc5q8f00qs
Folllow the money. nostr:note1gzy3ys09yx2l2a0twkw5p5gerjqdg5l0c8se3250pq4cew6fa5fs3wmrm7
#nothtr 
Wall street blooming 😂
nostr:note1qe8qjn5mz49s896hj9l9le2m05r53039y0u8qupuq9pl2k3fum3s0shnsx
Wow. Thank you so much for engaging in this dialogue with me, I learned a lot. 💜🫂💜
I don’t know if I necessarily agree with you that nobody would care; especially given how much authorities/others care about what address BITCOIN (UTXO’s) is sent to. Being set up in the mail is not unheard of. Perhaps the publicly distributed nature of the ledger would guard against this. I’d have to think about that one a little more deeply.
And if that address is known to the public; a corporate address, or a public figure for instance, couldn’t that address then have data which it would not like to be associated with now tied to their address, with the only way to rid themselves of association with the data being to spend the UTXO?
I agree. My original question (while stated incorrectly?) was:
Is spamming a UTXO set tied to a specific address something to be concerned about. You don’t think anybody has a UTXO set though.
If I have the keys to spend a certain number of UTXO’s, couldn’t I consider those mine?
I understand what you are saying, but I’m not sure if you understand what I am saying. My ignorance is likely to be the issue here. If I FAAFO on it, I’ll report back.
Thank you for taking the time to explain. So you can spam the UTXO set with unspendable garbage. Could this have any negative implacations for the controller of the UTXO set?
example: a UTXO tied to the runes protocol containing data that the entity who controls the UTXO set does not align with.
After doing some research, it seems runes are relatively easy to burn, but still incurr tx fees to do so. And I’m unsure if just transacting them as small UTXO’s during something like consolidation would be sufficient.
I will continue to study the endless 🐇🕳️ that is bitcoin; but I have also learned a lot on nostr and will continue to ask questions I cannot find answers to. Thanks again!
This looks interesting, going to bookmark. I just recently started running databag on a server and like it so far.
#plebchain
nostr:note1lycdv4rvwn2v9l84ge0qy4jfcp9w3svs7wd6y27gfqrqfs360efssc5dam
Ok, so if an inscription (like runes) which on the blockchain looks like a very small utxo (350sats), couldn’t you send this 350 sat rune to a bitcoin address (x)?
If so, couldn’t you essentially spam any bitcoin address with inscriptions?