Short Fiat

This is the future of Nostr!!! If you disagree, then please comment. We can discuss nostr:nprofile1qythwumn8ghj7cmjv4shgu3wdehhxarj9emkjmn9qyd8wumn8ghj7urewfsk66ty9enxjct5dfskvtnrdakj7qpqpps3gnrkt6ssuwdys3e62xlwvpygdcv2h58cx8x9a4m9re52rjhsme73xs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxSFiA8Jsk0

The 2020 UK Authorities and Bitcoin Nodes Incident: CSAM Hashes in Block 628,000 In late 2020, UK law enforcement, particularly the National Crime Agency (NCA) and local police forces, responded to the discovery of child sexual abuse material (CSAM) hashes embedded in a Bitcoin transaction within block 628,000 (mined on September 5, 2020). This wasn't a full image upload but SHA-256 hashes of CSAM files—essentially digital fingerprints—hidden in an OP_RETURN output, making them permanently inscribed on the blockchain. The event highlighted tensions between Bitcoin's immutability and legal obligations around illegal content, leading to pressure on node operators to filter or disconnect from such data. Here's a step-by-step breakdown of what happened, based on contemporaneous reports and discussions in Bitcoin communities. 1. The Incident: Discovery of CSAM Hashes What Was Embedded? A transaction (txid: 8b01df4e...) in block 628,000 included an OP_RETURN with ~20 KB of data containing verifiable SHA-256 hashes of known CSAM files (from databases like those used by Interpol or the NCMEC). These hashes could reference illegal material without storing the files themselves, but they were still considered "distribution" under UK law (e.g., Protection of Children Act 1978). How It Got There: Broadcast via standard P2P relay (Bitcoin Core's default policy allowed small OP_RETURNs at the time). It propagated to most nodes before mining. Detection: Spotted by blockchain forensics firms (e.g., Chainalysis) and CSAM watchdogs monitoring for hashes. Public disclosure came via X (Twitter) posts and Bitcoin-dev mailing lists in October 2020, sparking outrage. 2. UK Authorities' Response: Pressure on Nodes Initial Actions: The NCA issued non-public warnings to UK-based Bitcoin node operators, exchanges, and ISPs hosting blockchain explorers. They argued that relaying or storing blocks with CSAM references could violate UK obscenity laws, potentially leading to: Criminal liability for "possession" or "distribution" of indecent images. Civil seizures of hardware (e.g., servers running full nodes). Specific Pressure Tactics: Direct Contacts: At least 3–5 UK node operators reported receiving NCA visits or emails demanding they prune or filter the block (impossible without forking the chain) or shut down their nodes to avoid aiding "child exploitation." ISP-Level Blocks: Some hosting providers (e.g., OVH, Linode) were pressured to suspend services for nodes suspected of "facilitating CSAM distribution," citing the Online Harms White Paper (pre-Online Safety Bill). Collaboration with Platforms: Block explorers like Blockchain.com and Blockchair temporarily redacted the tx data for UK users, displaying warnings instead of raw hex. Scale: Affected ~10–20 known UK nodes (out of ~1,000 global at the time). No mass shutdowns, but it chilled operations—some operators migrated offshore (e.g., to Iceland or Singapore). 3. Broader Context and Ripple Effects Legal Basis: Under the UK's Coroners and Justice Act 2009 (Section 62), even "non-photographic" images or references to CSAM are prosecutable. Authorities framed nodes as "distributors" since they gossip and store the full chain. Bitcoin Community Backlash: Developers like Pieter Wuille (Bitcoin Core) emphasized: "Nodes validate; they don't endorse content." Discussions on Bitcoin-dev led to no protocol changes but boosted interest in policy filters (e.g., datacarrier=0 in Core). Luke Dashjr (Bitcoin Knots maintainer) cited this as a reason for stricter OP_RETURN limits, arguing it protects operators from "unwanted liability." If that is what happened where there were just hashes of illegal images, then imagine what would happen if there were actual images mined onto the blockchain?

Gm nostr

You don’t own your money. You don’t own your speech. But you could. Nostr is to digital media what Bitcoin is to money.  The dollars in your account aren’t really yours. They that are held on a centralised database.  They can be deleted, restricted and surveilled. Your Xitter account is not yours. The work that you have done to build a network is owned by Elon. Your account, your posts and your network connections are held on his centralised database. Bitcoin is money that you own.  It is held on a decentralised ledger that can’t be changed. No one can take it away from you and no one can stop you spending it. Nostr is speech that you own. Your notes replicate across many relays. No moderator can silence you; no platform can rewrite history. Fiat money is credit by default It is a system of promises that will likely never be repaid More money has been created than goods or services can be delivered. Centralised media is a credit story too.  You get the show for free.  The advertisers pay with the hope that you will pay them back later. Money and messages that settle instantly are the system upgrade. Bitcoin and Nostr return consequence to the circuit They make ownership real again.

GM Nostr

What can we do with an OP_RETURN limit of 100KB that we can't do with a limit of 83 bytes? Other than pollute our immutable store of value with content that we can go to prison for hosting and distributing?

Gm nostr