pull down to refresh

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @anon 13h \ parent \ on: BIP 444: Reduced Data Temporary Softfork bitcoin
This is not a preemptive measure, but an emergency response to an immediate crisis.
If this is such an emergency, why weren't they concerned about such transactions being mined before? It was possible, and yet no one was running around screaming about it.
Unless I'm mistaken, a user could have configured datacarriersize to be 100kb in many prior versions of Core. Also there was Libre relay, which I think would have relayed such transactions. Why wasn't this an emergency last year or the year before?
I don't like being pressured into doing things because people falsely claim it's an emergency.
It’s probably because the only miners / pools creating their own templates and not having human staff doing content moderation would be much more likely to be using the core defaults, if not knots, so if they upgrade to v30 the door is open I.e. some miners will mine big op_returns without checking what’s in them. It’s not known but the assumption is that direct submission also evolved for this reason. The large pools would never blindly include images coming to them via libre relay. We need to consider such possibilities; I see them disregarded in most of the anti-filter argumentation.
write
preview