Damus
Nate · 4d
Would BIP110 have stopped Satoshi from including the Chancellor On The Brink newspaper
nostrich profile picture
Nope - and nobody’s arguing about allowing 83 byte OP_RETURNs. BIP-110 allows that, just like Core v29.

There always has been and always will be some minor level of spamming. That’s not the problem. It’s the massive spam attack from ordinals and others over the past few years that’s the problem. Core v30 just made spamming easier. It’s time to fix this.

Please spend 10 minutes reading the BIP and you might realize that you actually support these common sense spam mitigations. It’s just a first step in the right direction that buys us a year to devise more robust solutions. That’s all.

https://bip110.org/

2
nostrich · 4d
It’s not a perfect solution, and doesn’t claim to be perfect. It’s better than allowing the spam problem to keep getting worse.
AU9913 · 4d
Half yalls camp argues that it's spam BC its non-financial transaction data....
Nate · 4d
Why are BIP110 proponents on nostr when there's CSAM on nostr? Can you point to a single instance of CSAM on the blockchain presently?
Kendy · 4d
Ordinals has retooled to be BIP 110 compatible. Now what?