Bastiat's Unseen, Chesterton's Fence, and Bitcoin
Thread
Login to reply
Replies ()
Good point on survivorship bias. Since we can see that BSV continued operating and no node operators on BSV suffered any legal consequences as a result of illegal content hosted on their machines, we can safely move on to worrying about other threats.
counterpoint
nobody cares about BSV
Nor is there any evidence of governments / prosecutors caring about illegal content in BTC. They only seem to care about financial flows.
oh
you're going to disintermediate the entrenched trillion dollar rent-seekers and theyre NOT going to use whatever leverage they possibly can to protect themselves?
good luck with that.
I can put illegal data on a bip-444 compliant chain. The irony is that generally it is the group of people obsessed with csam that have the hard drives full of it so I suspect we will see csam attacks from the knots crew is a post fork world and bitcoiners will likely ignore the withering lukecashjr coin.
The trillion dollar rent seekers as you call them were some of the first to get legal counseling on this issue. You're just ignorant.
X (formerly Twitter)
Bob McElrath (@BobMcElrath) on X
@evoskuil @murchandamus @Luffy_D_Dono When I was the Bitcoin SME at Fidelity I had to contend with this. There's links to dark web murder for hire ...
this is so obvious is reveals the glowing government agent behind the utterly uncharismatic and blisteringly awkward half-incarnate traitor and shitcoin grifter OP.
View quoted note →
cool
"some lawyers said its ok this one time"
clearly that means it could never ever be a problem
wtf is wrong with you man?
when did NOT thinking adversarialy become ok?
I dislike Kratter as much as the next guy but BSV surviving is NOT proof illegal content on the chain will not be an issue. maybe its just nobody cares about BSV...?
fact or STFU
nobody asked your opinion
thought i was agreeing with you but ok...
The onus is not on me to prove a negative.
The onus is on the fearmongers to prove their claims.
that logic isn’t assuring
🤣
also, all facts.
gfy
Jameson Slopp the evil shitcoiner and bad actor.
Jameson Slopp is an evil shitcoiner who is abusing Bitcoin with spam and shitcoin projects like Citrea.
View quoted note →
View quoted note →
View quoted note →
we already know youre a irrational cultist, sit down. every thread isn't an opportunity to share your nonsensical takes.
GFY
Don't we all agree that the law fair imposed on tornado cash developers and samurai developers is a travesty?
And it's that kind of power you're assuming won't be leveraged against CSAM on a node?
If software developers are at risk what makes you think that node runners aren't?
Got to make sure that edge case is accounted for, correct?
Running permissionless p2p software always has and always will come with risks.
Adjust your threat model accordingly.
Nobody cares about BSV.
garbage investor always come with risk
adjust your opinion model
Sure. One way of doing that is adjusting the permissionless p2p software to reduce the threat.
🤨 that doesn't make it ok.
People use tools to do things that aren't OK. Deal with it.
So you think that it's ok to misuse a tool because it's a tool?
Even if it hurts people?
One of the most commonly used weapons for murdering people is a hammer.
It's not OK to murder someone with a hammer.
It's still retarded to try to change hammers because some psychos use them to murder people.
From what I can understand, the people trying to change bitcoin are Bitcoin core developers who want to remove a filter that up until now has been preventing illegal content being uploaded.
Correct?
So who's the one trying to change the hammer? The person who says that killing people should be illegal and everyone should have access to hammers, or the person saying killing people should be legal but hammers should be banned.
That's how I understand it but I'm new to this whole thing, started learning about it yesterday.
that said, depreciating datacarriersize is unnecessary and stupid
I suggest listening to this for a synopsis of Core's position on the subject
Bitcoin Optech Podcast: Bitcoin Optech: Newsletter #373 Recap
Starting from: 00:28:28
Episode webpage: 
Media file: https://anchor.fm/s/d9918154/podcast/play/109077774/https%3A%2F%2Fd3ctxlq1ktw2nl.cloudfront.net%2Fstaging%2F2025-9-1%2F408486171-44100-2-4df39d090aa21.m4a#t=1708
Spotify for Creators
Bitcoin Optech: Newsletter #373 Recap by Bitcoin Optech Podcast
Mark “Murch” Erhardt and Mike Schmidt are joined by Matt Morehouse, Daniela Brozzoni, and Gustavo Flores Echaiz to discuss Newsletter #373.New...
You understand incorrectly.
It has always been possible to inject illegal content, and illegal content has existed in the blockchain for a decade.
why is an op_return increase - which itself feels like a hammer change - necessary?
It's not necessary, it's an optimization and incentivize alignment improvement.
Brilliant video, one of the best lately imo.
View quoted note →
First they sell out to VCs, Shitcoiners and the real dirty fiat created out of thin air.
Then they censor your opinion on Github.
Then they force a controversial change that already allows porn videos and any kind of spam on the blockchain.
Then they lie that filters don't work.
Then they tell you your node does not matter.
Then they tell you that your opinion is rubbish - Pleb Slop.
They don't know what spam is?
They don't know what Bitcoin is?
They are compromised.
View quoted note →
View quoted note →
Interesting: Pareto's 80/20 between core and knots, maybe 80% of the value comes from the 20% 🤔
So glad you brought Bastiat's "Seen and Unseen" into the discussion. Great piece.