The OP_FALSE OP_IF structure being detectable is a fair. If it’s identifiable as unreachable code, then filtering it is more technically objective than I was framing it. What happened with BSV and CSAM? I’m not familiar with that specific case but would like to understand the precedent you’re citing. I can accept that technical arguments and CSAM concerns can both be valid. My issue is specifically with the emergency framing and pool boycott tactics, not with raising CSAM as a legitimate risk factor in the debate. If the technical argument is strong enough on its own merits and the BSV precedent demonstrates real consequences, then the case should stand without the NOW NOW NOW urgency that bypasses careful consideration

Replies (2)

just search "BSV CSAM" on any search engine. it was a mess and node runners had to make their own client with filters. and invent pruning methods. there is a rush because v30 comes out this week. also you can watch videos of the "Bitcoin University" on YT , he aggregates many information in his videos. he has hours of content on it (probably, didnt count). there is also a video of BitcoinMechanic called "Bitcoin OG and Legend Jason Hughes Explains the Damage Of 100KB OP_RETURN". some old post from satoshi: image
There’s more going on than you realize. Hashers can switch pools with a few clicks. No mining pool wants to be a pariah. If a mining pool lets the wrong jpeg slip in they’ll never recover.