GM!
It was suggested in two different PRs ([0] and [1]) that the conceptual discussion take place in this thread, so I am submitting my comments here.
We are under a spam attack. This is not the first time this has happened. Bitcoin has endured several spam attacks in the past. They subside when bitcoin core devs show that they are serious about countering the attacks. This excellent summary from BitMEX[2] illustrates how altcoin-Ponzi spammers simply went elsewhere when the core maintainers at the time demonstrated a willingness to filter every new abusive transaction format until the spammers were exhausted.
We should not give up this time around! We should send the spammers back to Ethereum where they belong. This battle is worth fighting, in order to preserve bitcoin's status as the best medium of exchange and store of value the world has ever seen.
As history shows, the battle is winnable. Filter authors can keep writing new filters long after the VCs funding these abusive ventures have become insolvent.
Unfortunately, the bitcoin core project made a misstep when it rejected this PR[3] from Luke-jr to filter transactions using the op_false op_if envelope to exploit the witness discount. This signaled to the community that bitcoin core was no longer willing to merge filters for new kinds of spam, even if filter authors were perfectly willing to write them. This, of course, also had the effect of signaling to the altcoin Ponzi creators that it was open season to spam the blockchain.
What followed next was the most massive wave of spam we've ever seen. Onboarding of new users to bitcoin ground to a halt as fees soared. Users in poor countries were, of course, impacted the most[4].
I've seen lots of comments from anti-filter activists that "we shouldn't filter transaction types that have significant economic demand", but what these always fail to point out is that bitcoin core itself created this demand, by its ambivalence toward countering the spam. If Luke's PR had been merged, that would have been the end of it. Perhaps there would have been one or two copycats trying to get around the filters, but swift action by bitcoin core would have nipped those in the bud. At that point, funding for altcoin Ponzis built on bitcoin would have shriveled up or moved to other chains, just as it did in 2014.
Instead, we saw a sudden rush of new Ponzi schemes, all promising something new and innovative, because Ponzis on bitcoin, which were once treated with hostility, were now tacitly approved. Bitcoin core continued to double down on its "no more filters" policy[5], and the feeding frenzy of Ponzis reached a fever pitch.
Another trope from the anti-filter crowd I keep seeing is that spam protection is a "cat-and-mouse" game. Well, the cat won in 2014 and the mouse didn't come back until 2023. The cat has seemingly forgotten how to chase away the mouse, even though neither it nor the mouse has changed. The spammers have a bit more of a headstart than they did in 2014, perhaps, but that doesn't mean filter authors couldn't absolutely crush the entire "Ponzis on top of bitcoin spam" industry if the core maintainers would simply allow the filter authors to do their job. This isn't a matter of lack of will or manpower. There are plenty of devs willing to write filters for new spam formats as soon as they are announced, myself included. The problem is that core has signaled that, even if the filters are written, it will reject them, and that valuable labor will be lost. This is understandably demoralizing and has a chilling effect on devs who would otherwise be doing this important work.
We don't need to make sure no spam ever reaches the blockchain. That is, of course, impossible. All we need to do is show active hostility to the spammers, and the worst schemes (the ones that rely on a consistent transaction format) will be impossible to maintain, and will therefore lose funding. Of course there will be hobbyist spammers here and there, but that's much less damaging.
We are at a crossroads. Because of bitcoin core's hostility toward filter devs, the "economic demand" that everyone cites as the reason to allow more spam has steadily grown larger and is now crushingly huge. The firehose of spam that will be unleashed if we continue to appease the Ponzi spammers will eventually make bitcoin unusable as a trustless medium of exchange, and being a great medium of exchange is, of course, the main reason bitcoin has any value at all.
If we boldly rise to the challenge and fight back against the Ponzi spammers, then bitcoin has a bright future, perhaps becoming the dominant global medium of exchange and even the reserve asset. The Lightning Network is awe-inspiring and game-changing, and the devs who built it and finally made it a great UX are heroes. I can't wait to see where it takes us in the coming years!
However, if we instead cower in the corner and let fiat VCs trick us into thinking their spammy Ponzis are scary and not just silly mice we can chase away, then bitcoin's future is not so bright. We need only look at Ethereum to see what's waiting for us down that road.
It's up to us, and I'm confident that we will prevail, because history shows that bitcoiners are resourceful and never give up.
Sincerely,
Chris Guida
IrrelevantBoB
npub104…6eav8
2025-05-01 14:42:28
in reply to nevent1q…72da
Author Public Key
npub104j2xzlg4nl26cvxyzln3ccyt4pfk5zmj6tvgshtl4kmx5rgrf2qx6eav8Published at
2025-05-01 14:42:28Event JSON
{
"id": "d2b86cc87c5c842dba188b4ae0466fd5f7a7eef8a63e10ebf83fe610a34896f8",
"pubkey": "7d64a30be8acfead618620bf38e3045d429b505b9696c442ebfd6db350681a54",
"created_at": 1746110548,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"598952133dcfc2669836217f9a75a3df52946a985615d0989d3a920c8e29dcdc",
"",
"fork"
],
[
"p",
"7d64a30be8acfead618620bf38e3045d429b505b9696c442ebfd6db350681a54"
]
],
"content": "GM!\n\nIt was suggested in two different PRs ([0] and [1]) that the conceptual discussion take place in this thread, so I am submitting my comments here.\n\nWe are under a spam attack. This is not the first time this has happened. Bitcoin has endured several spam attacks in the past. They subside when bitcoin core devs show that they are serious about countering the attacks. This excellent summary from BitMEX[2] illustrates how altcoin-Ponzi spammers simply went elsewhere when the core maintainers at the time demonstrated a willingness to filter every new abusive transaction format until the spammers were exhausted.\n\nWe should not give up this time around! We should send the spammers back to Ethereum where they belong. This battle is worth fighting, in order to preserve bitcoin's status as the best medium of exchange and store of value the world has ever seen.\n\nAs history shows, the battle is winnable. Filter authors can keep writing new filters long after the VCs funding these abusive ventures have become insolvent.\n\nUnfortunately, the bitcoin core project made a misstep when it rejected this PR[3] from Luke-jr to filter transactions using the op_false op_if envelope to exploit the witness discount. This signaled to the community that bitcoin core was no longer willing to merge filters for new kinds of spam, even if filter authors were perfectly willing to write them. This, of course, also had the effect of signaling to the altcoin Ponzi creators that it was open season to spam the blockchain.\n\nWhat followed next was the most massive wave of spam we've ever seen. Onboarding of new users to bitcoin ground to a halt as fees soared. Users in poor countries were, of course, impacted the most[4].\n\nI've seen lots of comments from anti-filter activists that \"we shouldn't filter transaction types that have significant economic demand\", but what these always fail to point out is that bitcoin core itself created this demand, by its ambivalence toward countering the spam. If Luke's PR had been merged, that would have been the end of it. Perhaps there would have been one or two copycats trying to get around the filters, but swift action by bitcoin core would have nipped those in the bud. At that point, funding for altcoin Ponzis built on bitcoin would have shriveled up or moved to other chains, just as it did in 2014.\n\nInstead, we saw a sudden rush of new Ponzi schemes, all promising something new and innovative, because Ponzis on bitcoin, which were once treated with hostility, were now tacitly approved. Bitcoin core continued to double down on its \"no more filters\" policy[5], and the feeding frenzy of Ponzis reached a fever pitch.\n\nAnother trope from the anti-filter crowd I keep seeing is that spam protection is a \"cat-and-mouse\" game. Well, the cat won in 2014 and the mouse didn't come back until 2023. The cat has seemingly forgotten how to chase away the mouse, even though neither it nor the mouse has changed. The spammers have a bit more of a headstart than they did in 2014, perhaps, but that doesn't mean filter authors couldn't absolutely crush the entire \"Ponzis on top of bitcoin spam\" industry if the core maintainers would simply allow the filter authors to do their job. This isn't a matter of lack of will or manpower. There are plenty of devs willing to write filters for new spam formats as soon as they are announced, myself included. The problem is that core has signaled that, even if the filters are written, it will reject them, and that valuable labor will be lost. This is understandably demoralizing and has a chilling effect on devs who would otherwise be doing this important work.\n\nWe don't need to make sure no spam ever reaches the blockchain. That is, of course, impossible. All we need to do is show active hostility to the spammers, and the worst schemes (the ones that rely on a consistent transaction format) will be impossible to maintain, and will therefore lose funding. Of course there will be hobbyist spammers here and there, but that's much less damaging.\n\nWe are at a crossroads. Because of bitcoin core's hostility toward filter devs, the \"economic demand\" that everyone cites as the reason to allow more spam has steadily grown larger and is now crushingly huge. The firehose of spam that will be unleashed if we continue to appease the Ponzi spammers will eventually make bitcoin unusable as a trustless medium of exchange, and being a great medium of exchange is, of course, the main reason bitcoin has any value at all.\n\nIf we boldly rise to the challenge and fight back against the Ponzi spammers, then bitcoin has a bright future, perhaps becoming the dominant global medium of exchange and even the reserve asset. The Lightning Network is awe-inspiring and game-changing, and the devs who built it and finally made it a great UX are heroes. I can't wait to see where it takes us in the coming years!\n\nHowever, if we instead cower in the corner and let fiat VCs trick us into thinking their spammy Ponzis are scary and not just silly mice we can chase away, then bitcoin's future is not so bright. We need only look at Ethereum to see what's waiting for us down that road.\n\nIt's up to us, and I'm confident that we will prevail, because history shows that bitcoiners are resourceful and never give up.\n\nSincerely,\n\nChris Guida",
"sig": "0c8739930309013e843f792cbef31110a8ebf85ffb7b1b71fbbf531edd688dc8ea6e6611faf75d522de0a223acfc70b050823fb4677ffaf3f02fe512f8f97e02"
}