reply on: Gmax's theocratic populist sex prohibition analogy for filters \ stacker news ~bitcoin

pull down to refresh

0 sats \ 2 replies \ @fourrules 8h \ parent \ on: Gmax's theocratic populist sex prohibition analogy for filters bitcoin

Good idea or not, SOMEBODY will try to mess up the network (or co-opt it for their own use) sooner or later. They'll either hack the existing code or write their own version, and will be a menace to the network.

I admire the flexibility of the scripts-in-a-transaction scheme, but my evil little mind immediately starts to think of ways I might abuse it. I could encode all sorts of interesting information in the TxOut script, and if non-hacked clients validated-and-then-ignored those transactions it would be a useful covert broadcast communication channel.

That's a cool feature until it gets popular and somebody decides it would be fun to flood the payment network with millions of transactions to transfer the latest Lady Gaga video to all their friends...

That's one of the reasons for transaction fees. There are other things we can do if necessary.

The problem here is that Core developers are actively stating that there is no such thing as spam, validity is the only criteria, which is a complete and explicit shift away from Satoshi's and the community's intention and understanding for 15 years.

Core developers are breaking the social contract, leading inevitably to the menace of multiple implementations.

The design supports a tremendous variety of possible transaction types that I designed years ago. Escrow transactions, bonded contracts, third party arbitration, multi-party signature, etc.

Nowhere here does he include jpegs, runes, or short videos. He could have, but he didn't.

The problem is that Core developers and their advocates here are lying about the distinction between monetary and non-monetary transactions, because we have been infected by shitcoiners whose own projects failed in the shitcoin distributed database market.

And Core is playing brinkmanship, extorting the community. Anyone who cannot distinguish spam from monetary transactions should in good conscience walk away from the repo until other developers step up, let it sit, let it go through a dormant period, until the dust settles on this.

By forcing the idea that bitcoin is just a distributed database they are creating the scenario where people invested in a monetary network have to fight to protect their investment.

Fees on their own simply won't outcompete spam on fees, not when lightning and other means of transacting bitcoin exist on L2. When there is a scarce resource (block space) people will create all kinds of competitions to exhaust that resource, as a sort of prize, a sorting mechanism.

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @ZezzebbulTheMysterious 2h

I wish you would direct your anger at the vandals, not at the janitors.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @fourrules 1h

But the janitors are saying there is no such thing as litter!!!

To be clear, this was a statement from a younger core developer on a recent podcast who seems to have been one of the instigators of this ridiculous debate.

Wuille and Maxwell wouldn't have said there is no such thing as spam just because it cannot be defined deterministically.

The softer position of the spam-apologists is that it exists but will be tamed by fees, which is not a position based upon evidence given the amount of capital invested in shitcoins to date, and the intense historical pressure there has been for bitcoin to support spam as a serviceable market rather than maintaining hostility.

The distributed database on a Blockchain shitcoins only exist because bitcoin is hostile to them.

To hear so many so-called Bitcoiners, who want to be on the winning team but also the winning team has to do what they want, which always fails, to destroy the distinction between monetary and non-monetary transactions and just let the market sort it out.

Satoshi said "There are other things we can do if necessary"

But now Core Devs want to use that same quote out of context to suggest that there was never ever a plan to do anything other than let fees sort it out.

Bullshit!!!

Any Core developer or so-called Bitcoiner who denies the distinction monetary and non-monetary transactions, and therefore the existence of spam as a concept, should fork off, bow out, they are not Bitcoiners. Not because I said so, but because they don't understand bitcoin or want to change what it is against the will of everyone who has invested the 1000 hours to understand and invest in it, technically, financially, intellectually, reputationally, or in any other way.