ExploreTrendingAnalytics
Nostr Archives
ExploreTrendingAnalytics
ManyKeys33d ago
Bitcoin is permissionless. The protocol doesn’t care about your definition of “money.” If miners include it and users pay for it, it’s valid. Nodes choose their own policies. That’s not censorship — that’s markets. #Bitcoin isn’t a bank. It’s a neutral settlement network.
💬 2 replies

Thread context

Root: 7c7041b866ca…

Replying to: 79fd5da1cb0e…

Replies (2)

77fc628…3e877233d ago
I think this libertarian view of “permissionless” (without any boundaries whatsoever) is a risk for bitcoin. Yes, the protocol allows it, but that doesn’t make it good for bitcoin, and until Core v30, default node policy discouraged it. We should agree that bitcoin needs to focus on being money and leave the other use-cases to other protocols/platforms. I’m not a fan of BIP-110, but Core really dropped the ball on spam and that’s not good for bitcoin. Are you running a Core v30 node?
0000 sats
77fc628…3e877233d ago
If miners including it is sufficient for it being ok, that’s ignoring the centralization impact of the externalities they impose on nodes. If miners choose to include even more toxic arbitrary data due to the lax Core v30 filters, or massive amounts of non-financial data (even if it’s not toxic) then fewer people will run nodes, and Bitcoin gets more centralized, which increases the risks of (future) censorship.
0000 sats