ExploreTrendingAnalytics
Nostr Archives
ExploreTrendingAnalytics
Ee83ca4…d3f4584d ago
I need someone to answer this question for me because i don’t grasp the logic fully. We agree that bitcoin is money that cant be censor, so we want to censor spam from the chain. Do we see the faulty logic here? It’s not about whether spam should be allowed or not, wouldn’t the game theory just filter it out as transactions go higher and higher. It would be like flushing money down the toilet on purpose. Im all for people running tons of different nodes, but i kind of feel like if spamming the chain would kill bitcoin like many claim then bitcoin is not as strong as we thought.
💬 0 replies

Replies (4)

Tauri3d ago
You don’t censor spam, you rate limit it. Censorship requires content moderation by a centralised entity. There is no such entity in Bitcoin besides core devs. The rest are nodes that don’t do content moderation. They enforce rate limits, and they always have. Honestly it’s tiresome reading about the censorship narrative. Core propagandist just throw away some words like censorship, permissionless, free markets (all good stuff) but without the nuance around them and plebs eat them up and start repeating them ad infinitum. It’s so stupid.
0000 sats
Moist3d ago
to claim stopping, or at least reducing, spam is "censorship" is the most retarded, illogical take possible.
0000 sats
Tjefferson3d ago
Censoring spam is not censoring bitcoin- it’s making it a monetary network only. The bribed/corrupted Core developers are turning bitcoin into a spam network like ETH specifically to make it weak enough to fail.
0000 sats
JackTheMimic3d ago
This this way, for public record you have to write down everything that is said. (In an English-speaking place) Everyone can say anything they want. But if a large section of people say things in chinese now the recorders are writing paragraphs of phonetic translations with english characters. This creates a strain on everyone trying to read the record and creates an attack vector where people embed very offensive things in chinese phonetics that when said in english most people wouldn't like to say or read. Narrowing the rules of "You can only speak english but say ANYTHING you want" is not a censorship of idea conveyance (the point of language). The point of a protocol is its purpose. The purpose of bitcoin is to transfer units from one set of addresses to another. Creating outputs that go nowhere, creating unspendable outputs, embedding superfluous data in an input, and creating anchorpoints on outputs that hold massive data stores are all outside this purpose. Saying no one can define spam or it's a meaningless distinction are using somekind of post-modernist "nothing means anything" anti-logic.
00
0
0 sats