20:00
4
min at reading ▪
The big bitcoin network cleaning is back on the table. Some talk about digital hygiene. Others, masked censorship. And in the heart of this agitation, name: Grassfedbitcoin. This developer issues an old debate and accuses spammers of suppressing the protocol. And now the old men wake up. Saifdean Ammous, author of “Bitcoin Standard”, says he is ready to financially support a technical crusade against what he considers the deviant use of bitcoins. A group of jealous or temple guards?
In short
- Grassfedbitcoin re -launches the idea of filtering the inscriptions via the requirement Sweater #28408.
- Ammous financially supports anti-spam developers to cleanse the bitcoin protocol.
- Adam is evokes the endless plant between spammers and filters and therefore potential ineffectiveness.
- The debate reveals a fracture between strict monetary use and absolute chain.
Bitcoin filters: A disturbing idea
Grassfedbitcoin wants Re -open the request sweater #28408. It would allow bitcoin nodes to automatically filter famous “inscriptions”. These data, often images, saturate blocks without actual cash usefulness. It’s a drift for him. Declares:
No one wants to pass on the inscriptions. Give them tools to make them configurable and define the default principles that make Bitcoins as a whole contribute to money activity-and not for saving JPG.
And add that the previous increase in the OP_TREN limit was based on false hypotheses. She asks Default policy, modularwhich supports financial transactions and discourages images. This position, although supported, is not unanimous.
Adam Back, CEO of Blockstream, Tempers enthusiasm. It is for him “Armament race”. Explains that spam can always mask as a valid code: ‘ The code is infinitely variable “He said. So spammers can always do around filters.
But for Grassfedbitcoin, SPAM mechanics remain predictable. ” If you give me filters, I will use them Says. His argument: with sufficient adoption, SPAM is reduced by technical limits.
Bitcoin or Bitstore? The identity of the protocol in the game
The question goes beyond this technique. It touches the soul of the bitcoins itself. Is it a reserve of the value or submission of the JPEG file? For Ammous it is clear: you have to act. ” It’s not easy but it’s worth trying to destroy spammers faster “, He writes. It insists: filtering is not censorship.
Nodes already refuse invalid transactions. Filtering is therefore the right to use, not an attack on freedom.
However, the opposition remains alive. Some evoke an authoritarian drift, others argue Freedom. More technical voices recall that the current spam uses a witness to signature (a witness discount) to reduce UTXO base, but which increases it in practice.
Here is a summary of the blocks to strike:
- The average block could reach 4 MB with inscriptions (Source: Memapool Research);
- The current block is around 1.5 MB;
- The witness of the signature is diverted from its initial function;
- The filters may reduce the spam in a non -linear way;
- Forks and nodes already offer these options, but few are accepted.
Behind these characters, War. Some want pure bitcoin, focused on currency. Others, spaces without restrictions. Two utopias compete.
Recently, OP_return has already caused a lot of ink. As the proposals solidify, it seems to be the whole structure of the bitcoins that is ready to switch. More than a debate about spam, it can be a deep point of identity turnover for the protocol.
Maximize your Cointribne experience with our “Read to Earn” program! For each article you read, get points and approach exclusive rewards. Sign up now and start to accumulate benefits.
Blockchain and crypto revolution! And the day when the impacts will be felt on the most vulnerable economy of this world, I would say against all the promises that I was there for something
Renunciation
The words and opinions expressed in this article are involved only by their author and should not be considered investment counseling. Do your own research before any investment decision.