It sounds convenient, but the OP_RETURN size limit is intentionally small to protect Bitcoin’s decentralization. Allowing large encrypted payloads would encourage blockchain bloat, increase long-term storage and bandwidth costs for all nodes, and turn Bitcoin into a general data-storage system. The cost and inconvenience you mention are deliberate disincentives. Also, storing a seed phrase on-chain—even PGP-encrypted—creates a permanent risk if the encryption is ever broken. Safer practice is to keep sensitive data off-chain and, at most, anchor a hash or reference on the blockchain rather than lifting the OP_RETURN limit
What you are talking about is simple logic. They won't understand what you are talking about.
In order for coretards to understand what you say, you have to think like them. You have to do absolutely nothing about the 4 year long current spam attack, and you have to talk about spam as if it were an unstoppable force of nature.
They think they can't stop spam, while they are actively rejecting new ordinal filters, and blowing up the op_return filter. And so they think the only way to deal with spam is to create more ways to spam.
And most importantly, you have to treat every anti-spam measure as it it were censorship. If anyone tries in any way to stop coretards from posting dickbutt jpegs, that's censorship akin to censoring all Iranian UTXO's or all non-OFAC compliant UTXOs. Because coretards think node runners don't know the difference between dickbutt jpegs and Iranian UTXO's.
Is that your alt account you're talking to, Pepe?
Thanks for bumping my thread anyway for free
If you care about people viewing your stupid monster analogy, you should move it to the General section where 5x more people will see it. Here in the Dev & Tech section a lot less people will see your thread, and they don't care as much about spam in this section.
But the spam promoting mods are likely to move it back to a lesser section again. However since you are promoting spam, your thread has a higher change of not getting moved around.
Seriously, do you think swearing will make your arguments look more intelligent?
So you want to promote spam AND you want respect? Sorry cupcake, that's not going to happen. You have to pick one or the other.
The trouble is actually caused to nodes who have too strict datacarriersize configurations, as these have to re-download the transactions they previously "filtered" and then rejected, causing them higher bandwidth costs. Miners?
The most important duty of the nodes is to regulate the miners. The nodes do that by verifying that the blocks are valid, and by filtering spam.
But you are claiming if the nodes just learn not to filter and to go along with whatever the miners want to mine, no matter how spammy, than the nodes will have an easier job.
This retarded idea that nodes have to go along with miners and bend the knee to spam, it's pure post modernist bullshit.
I don't believe Bitcoin is particularly cheap as a data storage. Even if you add the "forever" word and limit yourself to blockchains which may be able to compete with paper for longevity.
Call Google and ask them how much they charge to store whatever file you want, until the end of time, even after you die, on 90,000 separate Google servers for redundancy. And tell them that you reserve the right to submit whatever material you want, without them monitoring how illegal/gross/immoral your data is.
Solana, BSV, and other chains are much cheaper.
They are all scams. Everyone knows it. Spammers want to put their filth on the only legit and original real blockchain. And the coretards ate bent on making it easier for them to do so.
But your idea that spam is not a problem, that miners filling their blocks with spam, that's not a problem either. That the real problem is nodes filtering spam and not going along with what miners want, that falls in line with the core policy they impose on all their nodes.
As I pointed out in an earlier thread, if you create a model for 'forever' that involves paying into an investment account then using the dividends to pay for S3, -- it turns out that even Amazon S3 'forever' is orders of magnitude cheaper.
Wonderful! Now how about you call Amazon and ask them if they will allow you to upload any sort of illicit/immoral/illegal files on 90,000 servers, and keep it forever for you.
Ask them if they moderate child p**n, snuff, rape stuff, and other disgusting stuff.
Because since core 30, bitcoin will do that for you. Thank you, coretards!
This isn't to say that I agree with their motivations or like their motivations
You can claim all day that you disagree with spam. But your actions speak louder than your claim.
- You elude that filters are a form of cebsorship. When you, yourself, wrote in some of those filters.
- You shill for core removing a filter.
- You insult and resist every simple attempt at fighting spam
Your actions say it all, you are a spam shill.
Between that and the other blockchains, as you note, it means anyone putting data in Bitcoin is almost certainly motivated by what they consider a compelling reason to do so. Which is why speedbumps are not very effective, why they're willing and able to just directly pay miners and bypass any relay policy, etc.
That is such bullshit. There are around a dozen filters already running on core since forever. Except the one core just neutered.
And if you look back, you will see that 99.99% of the transactions miners put in their blocks go along with the filters widely applied by nodes. Filters work. Stop repeating this bullshit that they don't work.
In fact the coretard logic is pretty transparent:
- "The filters don't work, but we have to turn off the filters because they prevent us from doing what they are filtering for."
So tell us cupcakes, if the filters don't work, why do we have to turn them off? If the filters don't work, why doesn't citrea just use the large op_return with the filters up?
- Because, obviously, filters work.
Certainly all the blather about it is an astonishing amount of free advertisement that they couldn't otherwise get at any price-- and that's worth pretty much any amount of transaction fees. For the last year the biggest promoters of NFT crap have essentially been the ocean-affiliated pro-censorship crowd and their buddies. This is another big advantage they get by using Bitcoin-- but unlike the limited supply it's one we don't have to give them.
Spammers stay on bitcoin because:
- They finance core
- Core did nothing about spam for the last 4 years since it started.
- Core lead dev doesn't even acknowledge there is such a thing as spam. She refers to it as "use cases we have today" and she claims that Satoshi failed to make room for it.
- Core sent as far as blowing up a spam filter.
- You coretards keep parroting that fighting spam is censorship.
Here is the reality. All the Amazon servers and Google drives of this world won't allow you to upload illicit, illegal, or sensitive material. They don't want to be held liable for that stuff. So they filter all the content that gets uploaded.
Go ahead, call Amazon and ask them to host child p**n forever on 90,000 Amazon servers. See how much they are willing to charge you for that service.
Because core 30 will do it for you. They'll force the 90,000 nodes to host your filth for free and for eternity. And for practically free too!
That's when the coretards come in and say "They could always do that all along"
Explain how, coretards. Give specific details. Will you break the file into 40 smaller pieces, and obfuscate the 40 pieces to make them look like a genuine transaction? Something that no antivirus and no drive scan will ever recognize as child p**n?
Will you go to a miner and offer him a fee to post your child p**n? Because they won't do that!
Will the file be contiguous, like in a blown up op_return?
I want details, exactly how "that was always possible"?
[moderator's note: consecutive posts merged]
