If the US government wants to spend 200M to attack Bitcoin, they can do it today with inscriptions - permanent bloat that never expires and costs less capital. Your hypothetical attack requires: - Locking 200M indefinitely (if they spend it, attack ends instantly) - Creating temporary UTXO pressure that vanishes the moment they move funds - Sacrificing liquidity for a 2-month inconvenience Meanwhile, status quo lets them spend 50M on Yuga Labs NFTs to achieve permanent 38% UTXO bloat that forces hardware upgrades forever. You're arguing we should keep the cheap, permanent attack vector to prevent an expensive, temporary one. That's not defense - that's suicide pact logic. "BIP-110 forbids soft forks" is nonsense. BIP-110 is a soft fork. It doesn't prevent future ones - miners can still signal for new rules. You're making up constraints that don't exist. The nation state already won. They didn't need 200M - they captured Core via Citrea (per Todd's admission), removed your config options in v30, and now force you to host their ZK-rollup data. Why burn capital when you can just merge PR #32406? If China wants to knock nodes offline, they don't need a "fast attack." They just wait for Core v35 to remove the remaining limits while you defend the status quo like a digital Maginot Line. Run Knots. The 200M boogeyman is fiction; the 38% bloat in your RAM right now is fact.