Top Tweets for #bitcoinCore30

This is the perspective that has gotten missed: There is no context in which you would let random, anonymous strangers upload 100kb files to your computer on a self-regulating p2p network. The constant appeals to censorship resistance are a complete red herring. Mempool filters have never resulted in censorship - But even if they did, censorship resistance can never come at the expense of people neglecting to take responsibility for what their computers are doing. Here's what's different with OP_RETURN - Old methods of storing nasty stuff in the chain required tonnes of obfuscation to work. The data necessarily would get broken into multiple chunks and someone would need to intentionally reconstruct it all and people naively relaying/storing it can plausibly absolve themselves of responsibility in doing so. OP_RETURN at default 100kb size kills plausible deniability completely. You're downloading, processing and uploading *raw* gigabytes of disgusting JPG and MP4 files. And Core are (for now) deprecating your ability to do otherwise. 80 bytes of OP_RETURN is a couple of hashes or a 16x16 pixel JPG. No one can realistically do anything with that that's going to make running a Bitcoin node unacceptable. 100kb is a different story. That's a low quality video of God-knows what. And I'm sorry, but having a neutral monetary network does not require treating all data the same way. I am expected to discriminate against certain types of data in every context. I just usually rely on third parties to do that on my behalf. Bitcoin doesn't work that way, it's on us to self-regulate and if we can't, running a Bitcoin node is going to be rightly stigmatized and no one is going to do it outside of tightly regulated environments.