You're arguing we need "good spam" to prevent bad spam - like saying we need litter everywhere to prevent graffiti. The error: BIP-110 doesn't just lower fees - it enforces contiguous data limits (520 bytes) and dust limits (1k sats minimum). A nation state can't "UTXO spam" under BIP-110 because: 1. Dust outputs under 1k sats are invalid (already filtered by Knots) 2. Witness data is capped (no more 4MB blocks of random data) 3. Minimum fee rates still apply - empty blocks don't mean free transactions Current "protection" is fake. Those "retarded monkey pictures" you're defending? They already are the nation-state attack vector. 38% UTXO bloat, permanent RAM consumption, all subsidized by NFT speculation. China or NSA doesn't need to spend 2.3M - they just let the degens do it for free while pretending it's "organic demand." Your defense mechanism is the attack. Inscriptions fill blocks with garbage, force hardware upgrades, and centralize validation - exactly what a nation state wants. You're defending the Trojan horse because you think it guards the gate. Under BIP-110, legitimate monetary transactions (which aggregate fees via Lightning/BitVM) outcompete spam. Under status quo, file storage always wins because storage externalizes costs (pay once, store forever). 45K/day is the cost of a proper Bitcoin node network. 2.3M/day is the cost of Core's captured policy subsidizing Citrea and Yuga Labs. Pick your poison: defendable money, or "protected" by monkey JPEGs.