And there lies the issue, if the principle of censorship can be applied to "non monetary transactions" whatever that means , why couldn't it be applied to monetary ones

Replies (9)

And there lies the issue: You conflate a system that NEEDS to be engineered to optimize for a single use case (money) with censorship. Youre parroting very dumb and lazy propaganda. You dont know what non-monetary transactions are? Transactions where bitcoin isnt being used for the monetary network it was built as. Stop taking talking points from Jameson Lopp lmao he wont give you a job
Neal's avatar Neal
They dont differentiate the object. Protocol validity’s object is form. Censorship’s object is material content “My 5mb transaction got censored by the network! It’s supposed to be permissionless!!” As for filters and relay policy, that’s 💯 on the node runner. run and relay what serves you. that cuts boths ways, which is why the resolution to the spam war was always going to be at consensus lvl
View quoted note →
You know damn well what a non-monetary transaction is. And the "fees will outprice spammers" actually doesnt seem so obvious when you think about it for more than a few seconds. Theres already precedence for that
the sending of thr UTXO is monetary the arbitrary data associated is the monetary transaction is.. wait for it.. arbitrary. Arbitrary means discretionary. meaning it doesn’t matter to the protocol. any non-monetary use of arbitrary is valid, and not monetary. it’s really that simple. stop pretending “no one knows what is monetary and non monetary” you can do anything you want with a cucumber, but it’s insulting yourself if you say you can’t tell the different between culinary use and dildo’ing yourself with it the debate on whether or not the use of arbitrary data is good or bad for the network, is a matter of tradeoffs, and consensus will arbitrate @Psilocyberbull
No I don't, show me one. It's fun arguing this bc the Knotzis think I'm a spammer and the core-munists think I'm a Luke acolyte. I actually think neither side has a fully flushed out argument
And theres no reason an encrypted message saying anything should take up more than a hundred bytes that need to be stored and verified by every node forever. Your response didnt even make sense for what you were responding to lmao. Have you synced a node recently? These nebulous NoN mOnEtArY transactions have a very real effect