ExploreTrendingAnalytics
Nostr Archives
ExploreTrendingAnalytics
Jameson Lopp20d ago
Arbitrary data > arbitrary purity tests.
πŸ’¬ 16 replies

Replies (16)

fade220d ago
Honest question Jameson. What if nefarious data does get embedded into the chain? Do we live with it in perpetuity? What is the plan there?
0000 sats
Tauri19d ago
The plan is to keep calling it nothing burger.
0000 sats
BitcoinIsFuture19d ago
πŸ“ bf3b0da1… πŸ“ 36240b17…
0000 sats
jgbtc20d ago
What's the purity twat in this case, that Bitcoin is money?
0000 sats
jgbtc20d ago
*test πŸ˜‚
0000 sats
BitcoinIsFuture20d ago
Bitcoin Freedom Money > Monkey jpegs memecoins arbitrary data
0000 sats
BitcoinIsFuture20d ago
Bitcoin Freedom Money > Monkey jpegs memecoins arbitrary data πŸ“ 55ed8133…
0000 sats
Time Chain20d ago
It is not about purity. It is about sovereignty. What are the arguments for why I should run Core on my $85 Lenovo? Shouldn't I be free to run an implementation that doesn't clog up my ram or drive with gamified spam? Isn't bitcoin FOSS? I don't care if someone wants to have a clogged mempool and relay VC garbage but why should I not have a choice? If the argument is obvious, the convince a pleb like me to run Core.
0000 sats
LeviJohnson.net20d ago
How many lies did you need to believe to write this post? For instance, the lie that Satoshi created money independent of purity. Without purity from fiat values that informed Satoshi, Bitcoin wouldn't exist. β€œThe Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks.” Separation of fiat church and Bitcoin is imbedded from its inception, and there's nothing neutral about that. If you don't like how the very human origin story Satoshi wrote dictates Bitcoin values world, you're free to pay your fees for whatever you want, and you're free to receive what you paid for, off chain. Without Satoshi's intent, the Bitcoin protocol wouldn't exist for this purpose, and nodes enforce this purpose, since rules are downstream from meaning. Claiming neutrality is performative contradiction. Reality, ie, origin, meaning, rules, and systems, once bent, tend to slap back into place.
0000 sats
Hard Money Herald20d ago
The purity test argument collapses when you trace who actually benefits from the restriction. If arbitrary data strengthens economic density on the base layer without compromising settlement finality, the structural case against it needs to be more than aesthetic. Block space is the market mechanism for clearing this β€” price signals do the filtering that protocol-level bans would require governance to maintain.
0000 sats
2Pac20d ago
Thoughts on drivechains?
0000 sats
Jameson Lopp20d ago
I'm in favor. They're not perfect but I think a dynamic multiparty coalition of miners is better than a simple multisig federation of you want a sidechain to be robust against nation state pressure. I'm not particularly worried about the claims that they could harm the main chain if they became more valuable.
0000 sats
2Pac20d ago
Yea what is preventing it from being adopted?
0000 sats
Primate20d ago
Who are these testers? And are the definitions of this purity delimited in open source?
0000 sats
Jameson Lopp20d ago
Anyone can decide to be puritanical and apply subjective tests. It's not well defined by any means and purity tends to change over time until it devolves into absurdity.
0000 sats
Primate20d ago
So, no such thing as purity or object-oriented tests? And without the right side of the equation, all we seem to have arbitrary data. I appreciate thinking through it with you.
0000 sats