What if the "spam attack" is something other than a spam attack?

[BitcoinATS.com]

It is possible to encode content into the blockchain by sending the types of transactions that are now being described as spam.  At least one press account identified the default address of Wikileaks as being targeted by the current wave of spam.  Has anybody attempted a forensic analysis of the blockchain transactions sending dust to that address (or all targeted addresses) to see if there is any recognizable form of content that is being encoded into the series of transactions?

Press accounts are now suggesting that ~30 BTC has been burned in these transactions.  That is nearly $8,000 at current exchange rates.  It is hard to believe that somebody would go through the effort and expense of sending random dust at this scale just to piss off the bitcoin community.

[chennan]

It is possible to encode content into the blockchain by sending the types of transactions that are now being described as spam.

No need to do so! Any output amount which is less than 5.46uBTC is considered dust or spamming the network. It will be treated as non-standard (won't be relayed, won't be mined). 546 satoshis is derived from the cost (in fees) to spend a TxOut/TxIn.It is not fixed, it will change as time goes by. 

Press accounts are now suggesting that ~30 BTC has been burned in these transactions.  That is nearly $8,000 at current exchange rates.  It is hard to believe that somebody would go through the effort and expense of sending random dust at this scale just to piss off the bitcoin community.

Probably the senders don't know the bitcoin operating mechanism and just mean to donate a small amount of money to them.

[el kaka22]

Press accounts are now suggesting that ~30 BTC has been burned in these transactions.  That is nearly $8,000 at current exchange rates.  It is hard to believe that somebody would go through the effort and expense of sending random dust at this scale just to piss off the bitcoin community.

Nope, the 30 BTC isn't burned. They are just paid of as miner's fees, and increasing miner's revenues. Now so many blocks having a 0.2+ BTC fees. It is unusual in the past (as fees normally between 0-0.15BTC). Some blocks even contain a 0.5+ BTC fee. Those fees are from the spam txs, and from everyone paying extra fees because of the spam.

[Scamc0p]

Well everything is hackable. This is there way of "testing the system" as hackers always say they are doing. But I agree with OP, they are pissing on the bitcoin community with this BS. 

[omahapoker]

Press accounts are now suggesting that ~30 BTC has been burned in these transactions.  That is nearly $8,000 at current exchange rates.  It is hard to believe that somebody would go through the effort and expense of sending random dust at this scale just to piss off the bitcoin community.

Nope, the 30 BTC isn't burned. They are just paid of as miner's fees, and increasing miner's revenues. Now so many blocks having a 0.2+ BTC fees. It is unusual in the past (as fees normally between 0-0.15BTC). Some blocks even contain a 0.5+ BTC fee. Those fees are from the spam txs, and from everyone paying extra fees because of the spam.

Though the coins are lost to the spammer as long as he doesn't own a huge farm and can make at least a big portion back.

@Original Poster... the fees were mostly donated, as far as i know. And the reason is that there are many people that want to show that we need bigger blocks now because there are still some people that think bitcoin needs to become a high payment provider without small transactions. Wouldn't make much sense as a currency but that's their solution.

At the moment i doubt that there are still many that doubt the need of a blocksize increase.