pull down to refresh
100 sats \ 2 replies \ @Scoresby OP 4h \ parent \ on: Giacomo Zucco on the history of filters in Bitcoin bitcoin
Let's pretend inscriptions are a government sponsored attack: clearly a government that wants to attack bitcoin isn't going to stop because we are trying to filter them out. If filters are that powerful, why are we using a difficulty -adjusted proof-of-work blockchain?
I agree. I delayed a few consolidations, and maybe used boltz or lightning more than I would have previously.
All in all, I think it's good that Bitcoin has had to deal with the inscribers and stampers and such. The more Bitcoin gets tested by people using it in ways we never anticipated, the more likely we find the problems and fix them. I get frustrated with the filter camp because they aren't proposing a solution that actually fixes this problem in the face of a state attacker. Any solution less than that isn't worth pursuing, from my ignorant, non-developer viewpoint.
If filters are that powerful, why are we using a difficulty -adjusted proof-of-work blockchain?
If you can incentivize a pool to mine jpegs rather than real transactions that you can sell at 1+x the cost to mine, why would you need any hashpower at all? This completely removes difficulty adjustments from an attack. Especially if you can literally create jpegs and shitcoins and uninformed people will buy them, gamble with them. It would make a pretty neat psyop. mind you I don't believe this is true, just doing the red-team thing
Governments can print money. It takes time for currencies to devalue against BTC on the open market, unless said printer would be used to directly buy BTC, when they're being printed and initially spent. Also this doesn't have to be done transparently. We don't really know that we can defeat large governments that actively attack Bitcoin. We will probably find out one day when we're in an oversold dip? Hopefully not soon though.
I agree that it's good that this happened, because there's tons more monitoring now and tons more discussion, even though it's very fucking cringe at times. I hate the narratives and personas, though. I personally subscribe to Peter's libre idea much more than to filters, but it's good that that's not the only opinion.
reply
There's a lot to think about in this one. But it might be even more fun to think about than AI consciousness!
reply