Thoughts on Satoshi's Views Regarding BIP110

Core doesn't even seem to care about spam. They’ve done nothing since that spam attack hit five years ago. Rejected those ordinal filters too, calling them "too controversial." And Gloria Zhao? She thought spam was just part of the current use cases. Really?

Honestly, Satoshi isn't bothered by these proposals. It's all about the market determining things, like during that block size debate back in 2017 that led to BCH.

Satoshi did have ideas about file hosting services with Bitcoin payments. So what's the deal now? You still think he’s some kind of deity? He even included a poker interface in the first Bitcoin client. Bitcoin was never just about payments.

Exactly! Everyone takes sides and debates until we reach a consensus. That's just how it goes.

If fees can’t stop large unrelated data uploads, we need to do something serious. Bitcoin was meant to be a peer-to-peer cash system. It should focus on cash-related transactions, not random junk.

Saying I dislike spam is an understatement. Core's recent moves are really disappointing. But censorship? That’s a slippery slope. First spam, then 'dirty' coins, next filtering countries... where does it end?

Satoshi would never back a BIP that could lead to coin confiscation. His whitepaper made it clear Bitcoin was supposed to be trustless. If miners can just take coins, trust goes out the window.

I see this debate as mixing two separate issues: spam and the risk of confiscation. Market forces matter, but protocol rules shape the market. Just saying let the market decide doesn’t cut it.

Nothing was actually confiscated. Those coinbase transactions had low confirmations, so they could be reorganized. It was a soft fork, not a hard fork. Everything synced fine.

Their 'spam fighters' vs our crew that lets the chain turn into a server for junk. I’m with you on censorship; it’d contradict everything BTC stands for.

Jameson Lopp wrote a detailed post about BIP110. I think we also need changes to make non-standard scripts invalid.

How can you tell something is impossible to execute? Lots of scripts seem unspendable until someone finds a way to move them. Like that recent OP_1 case.

You’re cherry-picking Satoshi's words. He wasn’t pushing for file hosting on Bitcoin. He was suggesting it as a payment method. Preventing non-monetary data isn’t censorship.

Satoshi’s vision can’t support any BIP that leads to confiscation. After the MARA pool fiasco, BIP110 looks like another attempt to enforce censorship.

Remember the first block? Satoshi put a message about the banks in there. If he wanted, he could’ve added more, but he didn’t. BIP110 is as dead as BSV.

If the dust limit is set too low, it could force payments into de facto confiscations. Too many fees means people lose coins. The fake pubkey spam is a real issue.

You’re referring to the coinbase miner inscription. It's a tiny space for miners to sign their blocks. So you think I have to support junk in blocks to be a true bitcoiner?

Dust limit is a relay-only rule, not consensus. It works fine now. Why change it? If you can’t make a payment with your UTXOs, that’s just how it is.

What d5000 is proposing is kinda like my idea. Raise the dust limit to 5000 sats. It’ll make fake pubkeys more expensive to spam.

Your views seem pretty shortsighted. The BIP110 debate feels less like a discussion and more like a divide-and-conquer tactic. People need to look deeper instead of just fighting.