Consensus rules let them in regardless. Relay policy is like having a feather as a deadbolt
Thread
Login to reply
Replies ()
Technicalities aside, as a node runner, it is good or bad for me to have to store arbitrary data on my my node?
It’s like the 2 sides are arguing at crossed purposes:
core = you can’t stop it so why try
Knots = it shouldn’t be there because that’s not what the protocol was intended for.
But as a pleb node runner is it better or worse for me that the data carrier size is gone?🤷 Feels worse but IDK
This is how lots of us feel @jb55 and are trying to get to first principles as to why this arbitrary data, in this format and size, is even on Bitcoin to begin with? 🤔
Shouldn't the main Devs be working to make BTC the best "money"?
If so, then they need to explain why it's *good* to encourage and be OK with people sending jpegs of cats to my node. 🫠
Is that what their best iteration of money is?
I believe data is representative and what it represents matters. Very sharply.
Bloating nodes with rando spam, opposed to financial transX data (sender, receiver, sat amount, fee) seems counterintuitive to the whole project's intent.
Is money just 'jump ball' to whomever wants to pay a miner the fee to push whatever they want to the entire network?
If it takes changing concensus to get rid of such spam, then perhaps we deserve a better "money".
Am I wrong? 🤷♂️
Or is not wanting random jpegs on my money censorship?
What even is Bitcoin to become? 👾
I guess people like the feather. We should keep our feather for now. Why remove it?
I think people are reading this as:
- there’s a spam problem
- there’s a weak filter mechanism in place
- proposing to replace the weak filter with nothing means “admitting defeat”/don’t care
I have no blockchain experience under my belt but while the core argument is technically sound I can see why people would react the way they are.
I think this is mostly a communication problem.