No worries, I also like the points you make, makes me rethink my opinion as well and also sharpens the image for myself when thinking about it.
2) I think it's not a hardfork, it will be along the lines "we accept the bigger OP_RETURNS until block 888888, but blocks following after that, will be rejected and no longer according to the protocol". This would anyways lead into a hardfork, because this would be an abuse case of the bitcoin chain that we try to fix.
But we must understand that a filter is neither a hardfork nor a fix. A filter simply sais "whoever is using bitcoin knots for his miner, will not be able to find new blocks that contain spam, they will only allow blocks that come from the outside". Running a bitcoin knots node does absolutely nothing, as far as I understand. It's only relevant for miners that are making use of it. If knots would not allow the spam-blocks, it would already have created a hard fork, but Luke Dashjr did not want that (yet... obviously).
toad / Toad
npub1l9…k5c52
2025-05-13 13:39:15
in reply to nevent1q…q5uv
Author Public Key
npub1l9vxtf5ypwussunj98tcf3ewpkgqwjcr65fxy24e3dj2zkwlz3ssfk5c52Published at
2025-05-13 13:39:15Event JSON
{
"id": "d2035167f3c49ee449e4461abede3e2067ab939e622dae56e9e2b7f895060d83",
"pubkey": "f95865a6840bb908727229d784c72e0d90074b03d512622ab98b64a159df1461",
"created_at": 1747143555,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"4c5b2dc45b027f2cfb571be7c5508c30612abeb74f997d587227d44050f5ae1b",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"f863a561eb8bc5293b76b531b703ab926e5c75b68a42cac462f75bd3dba6a193",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"74ffc51cc30150cf79b6cb316d3a15cf332ab29a38fec9eb484ab1551d6d1856",
"",
"mention"
],
[
"p",
"f95865a6840bb908727229d784c72e0d90074b03d512622ab98b64a159df1461",
"",
"mention"
],
[
"p",
"e13490fd23435a3c9b536e18e8309e9fd95475bf72a477b1166f2d4c651a2e63"
],
[
"r",
"wss://eden.nostr.land/"
],
[
"r",
"wss://nos.lol/"
],
[
"r",
"wss://relay.damus.io/"
],
[
"r",
"wss://relay.snort.social/"
]
],
"content": "No worries, I also like the points you make, makes me rethink my opinion as well and also sharpens the image for myself when thinking about it.\n\n2) I think it's not a hardfork, it will be along the lines \"we accept the bigger OP_RETURNS until block 888888, but blocks following after that, will be rejected and no longer according to the protocol\". This would anyways lead into a hardfork, because this would be an abuse case of the bitcoin chain that we try to fix.\n\nBut we must understand that a filter is neither a hardfork nor a fix. A filter simply sais \"whoever is using bitcoin knots for his miner, will not be able to find new blocks that contain spam, they will only allow blocks that come from the outside\". Running a bitcoin knots node does absolutely nothing, as far as I understand. It's only relevant for miners that are making use of it. If knots would not allow the spam-blocks, it would already have created a hard fork, but Luke Dashjr did not want that (yet... obviously).",
"sig": "73b6f82f1c9129e5756792000b7ffb482c1ced4e098460f932469f91d4d4599f8620e491ca67c71d860dbcc22106f05d87ae9133cafcc06d1481ca3aebb3a743"
}