Bitcoin proposal to curb spam with a temporary soft fork sparks debate among developers https://t.co/F0SfQzp9HB ...

RT Matthew R. Kratter (@mattkratter)@stephanlivera 5) If lots of people filter spam, it makes it harder for spam to get into blocks. Malicious actors can attempt to bypass the wishes of node runners by sending spam directly to mining pools via things like Libre Relay. These people need to be called out at the social layer ...

RT omerskywalker⚡️ (@0merskywalker)@NickSzabo4 @adam3us @satflation @jabulanijakes @BitMEXResearch @giacomozucco Lowering the barrier to abuse = increasing the ease of exploitationSure, motivated actors could already get their consensus-valid txs mined despite getting filtered out of the p2p network — but the latest changes make it trivial for even casuals to spam the timechainCui bono? ...

Core Argument - The report critiques Gloria Zhao's stance on defining "spam" in Bitcoin transactions, arguing her definition is too limited by focusing on resource usage rather than transaction content [2][3] - The author posits that defining "spam" requires considering the *purpose* of Bitcoin, which they believe is being undermined by allowing steganographic content [2] - The report introduces a "third way" to define spam, focusing on steganography's impact on the blockchain's low-entropy carrier signal, which neither top-down nor market-driven approaches adequately address [5][6] Technical Analysis - Steganographic content is defined as spam due to its disruption of the blockchain's low-entropy carrier signal, essential for transmitting high-value transactions [5] - The report outlines three ways to deal with steganographic spam: redefine system purpose, restrict system purpose, or ignore the problem, ultimately arguing against ignoring it [7][8] - The author places Zhao in the camp of redefining the system purpose to accommodate steganographic content, which they deem untenable due to logical contradictions [9] Ethical and Legal Implications - Defining steganographic content as legitimate use leads to the loss of *Mens rea* (guilty mind) defense, posing moral and ethical challenges [10] - Allowing arbitrary content introduces legal risks, potentially exposing the Bitcoin reference client to a wide variety of extreme legal risks [10] Sociopolitical Commentary - The author suggests that the attempt to be "apolitical" regarding Bitcoin's use is itself a political stance [10]

WhatsApp is testing a way to limit number of messages someone can sending in a month without getting a response to limit spam https://t.co/XWSJPyomz1 ...

#观察 X在整治垃圾广告与垃圾账号后，体验有所改善。Nikita Bier (@nikitabier):This week we purged 1.7 million bots engaging in reply spam. You should start noticing improvements in the coming days. We will be focusing on DM spam next. ...

RT Luke Dashjr (@LukeDashjr)Don't let the bad actors trick you into thinking Bitcoin Core 30 allows you to re-enable the datacarrier limit:1) Along with unlimiting the default, they also broke it further. datacarriersize=83 now (as of Core 30) allows for 83 outputs totalling 830 bytes of spam, instead of just 92 bytes of spam (9 bytes of which couldn't be arbitrary) as in Core 29 and earlier.2) datacarriersize is marked as deprecated, and explicitly planned to be removed in a future release (likely silently ...

Transaction Cost Analysis - The total cost of "spam" transactions exceeds their price in fees [1] - The infrastructure cost that spam forces the entire ecosystem to pay is a key concern [1] - Every transaction, whether spam or essential payment, contributes to this cost [1]

Protocol Abuse - The protocol is being obviously abused, which they can't see [1] - Using ONE OP_RETURN would be an endorsed way to spam, which is also bad [1] - Both protocol abuse and spam need addressing [1] Regulatory Concerns - Using ONE OP_RETURN is regulatory worse [1]

Decentralization & Censorship Resistance - Censorship resistance and spam curbing are fundamentally in conflict due to internet physics [1] - Prioritizing spam fighting conflicts with privacy, uncensorability, and decentralization [1]