Citrea's move exploits Bitcoin's openness, mirroring fiat's exploitation of fractional reserve banking, amplifying systemic risk.

Wow, this is interesting. Thnx for insights.

There are a lot more insights. I will show you just a few.

Jameson SLopp is an investor in Citrea who launched a centralized slavery shitcoin on top of Bitcoin.

And the cherry on top.

I received and event not found in your post.

I appreciated this information. I was not involved in the 2014 discussions. But I have defaulted to Andreas Antonopolous' take that essentially, removing spam is censorship. With that said, I can see the potential attack vector being exploited. So I am open to those running Knots, etc. And I'm put off by what I'm seeing as "Core", another attack vector. Anyway, thnx for opening my eyes to this.

If you are on Primal, they most probably are censoring some of my notes. You can try different web client such as iris.to or yakihonne.com Which nostr are you using?

I appreciate people like you who seek the truth. Andreas Antonopolous was one of the very best OG Bitcoiners and I have learned a lot from him. Unfortunately he changed and he replaced the truth with propaganda. It is really sad. Filtering spam is not censorship. Spam abuses, devalues and degrades Bitcoin. Bitcoin is Freedom Money, monetary network that transfers value, it transfer Bitcoin via Bitcoin monetary transactions. Bitcoin is not general purpose database or cloud storage. Big data is spam on Bitcoin. JPEGs, dickpics are spam on Bitcoin. Ordinals, Runes etc. are spam on Bitcoin. BIP 110 just limits big data abuse of Bitcoin. Thats it. And big data is spam on Bitcoin monetary network. Every byte on the Bitcoin blockchain is replicated on about 100 000 Bitcoin nodes. And we need even more nodes to be strongly decentralized.

I will make a new note, the same as the previous and lets see if they censor it as well. View quoted note → View quoted note → View quoted note →

We are all justifiably wary of anything that resembles censorship and core has exploited this quite effectively, duping a lot of reasonable bitcoiners in the process. Censorship is always carried out by a central authority. Claims that the actions of individuals expressing their own personal preferences is censorship flip the meaning of the word on its head.

Great take... I like how you present this. If the nodes can be kept decentralized, it reduces the central authority issue... and thus the spam censorship issue. But how is it any different than all the various decentralized nostr relays that block legit posts... because it appears they do.

🤙

I have seen Lopp being criticized as a shitcoiner, but did not have this insight. TY

I think what nostr relay operators are doing is more similar to a node filtering a valid *monetary* transaction for some reason. I disagree on principle with a node that does this (e.g. blocking sanctioned addresses) but even so would defend the right of an individual node operator to make this choice for themselves. In either case I think it can only be called censorship if there's an order to do it (or pressure) from a central authority.

Thank you... well said.