From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: Ali Sherief <ali@notatether.com>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] [Mempool spam] Should we as developers reject non-standard Taproot transactions from full nodes?
Date: Tue, 9 May 2023 00:02:51 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZFmNq6NzH4ruDsER@petertodd.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0aea4ec5-7d6a-f358-3c20-854001588031@dashjr.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1116 bytes --]
On Mon, May 08, 2023 at 06:37:34PM -0400, Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> Action should have been taken months ago. Spam filtration has been a
> standard part of Bitcoin Core since day 1. It's a mistake that the existing
> filters weren't extended to Taproot transactions. We can address that, or
> try a more narrow approach like OP_RETURN (ie, what "Ordisrespector" does).
> Since this is a bugfix, it doesn't really even need to wait for a major
> release.
Miners are making millions of dollars from these inscription transactions.
Miners can and do run their own nodes and interconnect to each other. Many
people like myself will continue to run nodes that do not attempt to block
inscriptions. And of course, the current flood of BRC-20 transactions embed
very little data in the chain per transaction and could easily be adapted to
use OP_RETURN or any number of other data embedding schemes; if they were
modified to embed no data at all they wouldn't be much smaller, and I'm sure
you'd still be complaining that they were spam.
--
https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-05-09 0:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-05-07 17:22 [bitcoin-dev] [Mempool spam] Should we as developers reject non-standard Taproot transactions from full nodes? Ali Sherief
2023-05-08 12:33 ` Michael Folkson
2023-05-08 12:58 ` Erik Aronesty
2023-05-08 17:13 ` Michael Folkson
2023-05-08 19:31 ` Ali Sherief
2023-05-08 19:47 ` Erik Aronesty
2023-05-08 20:36 ` Michael Folkson
2023-05-08 20:59 ` Erik Aronesty
2023-05-08 21:01 ` Erik Aronesty
2023-05-09 15:21 ` Tom Harding
2023-05-08 16:37 ` Melvin Carvalho
2023-11-03 10:15 ` Brad Morrison
2023-11-03 10:39 ` Melvin Carvalho
2023-11-04 9:58 ` ArmchairCryptologist
2023-05-08 22:37 ` Luke Dashjr
2023-05-09 0:02 ` Peter Todd [this message]
2023-05-09 1:43 ` Ali Sherief
2023-05-09 16:32 ` Erik Aronesty
2023-05-09 21:06 ` Tom Harding
2023-05-10 20:44 ` Keagan McClelland
2023-05-09 8:41 jk_14
2023-05-09 12:50 ` Erik Aronesty
2023-05-10 3:08 ` Weiji Guo
2023-05-11 13:12 Aleksandr Kwaskoff
2023-05-12 9:36 jk_14
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ZFmNq6NzH4ruDsER@petertodd.org \
--to=pete@petertodd.org \
--cc=ali@notatether.com \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=luke@dashjr.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox