pull down to refresh

Ordinals are spam at best, a dos attack at worst. Watch Giacomo Zucco's latest videos on censorship and you'll get it. Guy Swann, Beautyon, Parman, etc. are of the same opinion.
Some bitcoiner wannabe hero's feel they need to protect the network from spam filtering because fReeDoM, Odell included. They don't realize there is no absolute freedom in Bitcoin. There has always been "censorship" and filtering of certain tx. These people are false hero's, supporting shitcoin minting on Bitcoin in the name of fReeDoM. Tell me, why does the network censor me from sending 5 MB tx, or 100 byte op_return tx ?
Bitcoin is a p2p cash system, it's not designed for arbitrary data storage and disincentivizes it. Satoshi himself argued that spam can be mitigated with other means if fees are not enough. It's honestly bonkers to see bitcoiners defend the use of Bitcoin for data storage and shitcoin minting.
Ordinals are putting stress on small user adoption for almost a year now (fees alone have not been enough clearly). This can be viewed as an attack, pricing people out way earlier than expected in the adoption curve.
I am not advocating for big changes to Bitcoin, but people should understand the attack at hand and acknowledge it, only then can we discuss possible ways forward.
reply
Giacomo Zucco the latest video on YouTube is from 6 months ago. do you have a link to where he discusses ordinals? I understand why it could be considered spam but what about specific transactions that actually are spam should we block those too? I get your point but seems like a slippery slope
reply
There was also a censorship talk he did at Unconfiscatable 2023 (livestream day 1 on YT). Also found a talk on ordinals with Knut Svanholm: