đź“… Original date posted:2015-07-28
đź“ť Original message:> On Jul 28, 2015, at 5:43 PM, Jean-Paul Kogelman <jeanpaulkogelman at me.com> wrote:
>
>
>> Enter a “temporary” anti-spam measure - a one megabyte block size limit. Let’s test this out, then increase it once we see how things work. So far so good…
>>
>
> The block size limit was put in place as an anti-DoS measure (monster blocks), not "anti-spam". It was never intended to have any economic effect, not on spam and not on any future fee market.
>
>
> jp
>
I’m using spam and DoS somewhat synonymously here, although you’re correct - DoS is a more accurate term.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 842 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150728/da5402c9/attachment.sig>;
Eric Lombrozo [ARCHIVE] /
npub1az…t2krq
2023-06-07 15:43:41
in reply to nevent1q…z9j5
Author Public Key
npub1azvhdrf9fu6n0tm7yez4j6zcxcedp2ct6nrcq3z74naqs7kgpk8s5t2krqSeen on
wss://relay.nostr.bandPublished at
2023-06-07 15:43:41Event JSON
{
"id": "eb66950155472348f5a660f9514b1fa286448ca54c445044555bd8ac3c94405b",
"pubkey": "e899768d254f3537af7e26455968583632d0ab0bd4c780445eacfa087ac80d8f",
"created_at": 1686152621,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"78a0486a22513a5dc11dcf66d2407a7e121084a44d2ff4e480cb77dad38c8ddd",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"c8f9c005c10f8604b28f75a1f9cdc96478a87040b6b40803429ff476d0b77d84",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"874fa44d110b2119208ba6fb27607799f16a00c82143201ad7f179a89f0df349"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-07-28\n📝 Original message:\u003e On Jul 28, 2015, at 5:43 PM, Jean-Paul Kogelman \u003cjeanpaulkogelman at me.com\u003e wrote:\n\u003e \n\u003e \n\u003e\u003e Enter a “temporary” anti-spam measure - a one megabyte block size limit. Let’s test this out, then increase it once we see how things work. So far so good…\n\u003e\u003e \n\u003e \n\u003e The block size limit was put in place as an anti-DoS measure (monster blocks), not \"anti-spam\". It was never intended to have any economic effect, not on spam and not on any future fee market.\n\u003e \n\u003e \n\u003e jp\n\u003e \n\nI’m using spam and DoS somewhat synonymously here, although you’re correct - DoS is a more accurate term.\n-------------- next part --------------\nA non-text attachment was scrubbed...\nName: signature.asc\nType: application/pgp-signature\nSize: 842 bytes\nDesc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150728/da5402c9/attachment.sig\u003e",
"sig": "81362eead60e287e6f90403e72af5b1e39322d4fdb77e1b1ba44e9b0ad9cc58e4290f3d69630396a74f71d2cc9a5b1e271cfbf52f231a97c5df5fa2cbf13f26b"
}