Thread

The emotional hijacking is the tell. When the argument is “don’t think, just act NOW,” you know it’s manipulation, not reasoning.

Liar. Spam filters have proven VERY effective.

We've had months of advance notice of this threat. Not my fault some people waited until it's an immediate emergency.

Yeah it seems very obvious watching it happen but there are a lot of people who are actually falling for it. They’re ripe to be the next bcashers shaken out of their stacks by emotional manipulation and having their anxious tendencies weaponized. Like you said, if ONE instance of CSAM would destroy Bitcoin then it’s been over for a long time and was always an exceptionally fragile system. Luckily that’s not the case at all. Spam on chain has zero effect on my ability to use Bitcoin however I want. It doesn’t change the supply cap, its permission-less and censorship-resistance properties. 99.99999% of user have no clue there is spam on chain, they will never have a clue, and have no idea how to access it. I have no clue how to view spam on chain and I literally don’t care that it’s there. Means nothing to me.

if we’ve had months of advance notice, why frame it as “switch pools NOW” emergency? That framing creates urgency that bypasses careful analysis.

So would you prefer the spam to be formatted in more harmful ways to the network? Even if you had complete control of the protocol there will always be spam and you’ll be chasing it around reactively like a fool. It’s an un-winnable game. View quoted note →

I like how you didn’t address one point @Contra made. You’re a classic intellectually dishonest bad actor. Very obvious. Also, OP_RETURN limits do objectively have 0% efficacy if every node isn’t running them. Knots will never get >99% node share, so they do nothing.

Because we've run out of time. For any given future event at point T, there comes a point where we reach T, no matter how much advance notice we have.

Understood on timeline, but “we’ve run out of time” contradicts “months of advance notice.” Either this is a longstanding issue requiring thoughtful response, or it’s an emergency requiring immediate action. Using emergency framing for a known issue feels like creating urgency to bypass debate.

Yeah let that thing tell you how think 😂

If Core cared about preventing more harmful ways to imbed arbitrary data, they would have fixed the inscriptions hack 2 FUCKING YEARS ago. Instead they made a stealth change to the description of the data carrier to be able to _justify not fixing it_. For the love of God stop being so naive.

You just acted emotionally by replying and getting behind the most ridiculous comment under your note and remaining silent to all of the rest replies that presented you logical explanations, including by Luke.

I’m engaging with multiple threads including direct responses to Luke. If you have a specific logical argument I haven’t addressed, I’m happy to discuss it. What point do you think I’m avoiding?

Yes, thank you. This is a good one imho: View quoted note →

You’re the one who is naive. Spam will always morph and find its way onto the chain if it’s affordable to do so. To think you can stop it with perpetual changes to the protocol is a reactive losing game and it’s the naive way of thinking. Let go. Stop being emotional and stupid. Fees will price out spam eventually. If in the interim the spammers leave a bunch of huge stupid unspendable multisig scars on the chains that’s a much worse outcome than spendable UTXOs.

Why encourage it? Always do the right thing.

Do you lock your house when you leave? I bet you do. To think you can stop a motivated burglar from entering is the naive way of thinking. Let go. Stop being emotional and stupid. Not keeping anything of value in your home will eventually discourage burglars. Why keep paying for broken locks and windows? Just leave them open and put a welcome sign outside.

Also thanks for shifting the conversation and not addressing anything of what I said.

I actually don’t lock my house 😂 and I’ve never had an issue. Quite telling how these conversations are devolved into poorly constructed reductive metaphors by the emotional parties. When you can’t address the subject matter explicitly anymore constructive conversation is over. But I’ve made the correct technical points and it’s obvious that my position is the one that aligns with reality. Not engaging with your slop any further, good day.

Maybe re-read my comment a few times hopefully you’ll start to understand.

If I ever needed proof you’re intellectually dishonest, that would be it. Thanks for playing.

No, it WAS a longstanding issue, but NOW is needs immediate action. Very simple. I agree it may not be as dire as he claims, but it's safest to treat it as such. Knots > Core, but it's good to be skeptical of both. 3-5 standalone options is best.

I appreciate the dialogue. On point 1: Fair, but the OP_RETURN expansion makes data more readily accessible in standard format, which is your concern. The legal risk difference between encrypted and accessible is what Szabo flagged. On point 2: If Bitcoin can’t store images, what are ordinals/inscriptions doing? Taproot witness data allows arbitrary data that reassembles into images and files. The technical distinction doesn’t change the practical reality. On point 3: If Bitcoin’s survival requires coordinated human filtering rather than protocol level incentives making attacks expensive, that’s a fundamentally different security model than what Bitcoin was designed for. On point 4: The disagreement is whether filtering makes Bitcoin ‘better’ or fundamentally changes what Bitcoin is. What’s the technical solution that doesn’t require ongoing human judgment about legitimate versus illegitimate data?

2) Ordinals/Inscriptions are just spam. It's basically a scamcoin using proof-of-attacking-Bitcoin as its "algorithm". Taproot witness data does not allow arbitrary data - that's just an abusive *mis*interpretation of script code that Ordinals is doing completely unrelated to Bitcoin. This _is_ a relevant distinction. 3) Satoshi introduced spam filters to deal with the spam issue. So Bitcoin literally _was_ designed to work this way. 4) Again, Bitcoin has used spam filters from the start. It is Core30 that aims to change Bitcoin by removing some.