fy in plain text:

Pepe López

npub1h4qzcxeqtcwve6t22rulvw7kxdlt3emcwdg9qwrlq9glhdk4zsas20phjj

hex

4b74f9bbc9e81078b769179fab8d80873dea7ba632fdf9c35a6b75df1134a732

nevent

nevent1qqsyka8eh0y7syrcka5308at3kqgw0020wnr9l0ecddxkawlzy62wvsprpmhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuem4d36kwatvw5hx6mm9qgst6spvrvs9u8xva949p70k80trxl4cuau8x5zs8plsz50mkm23gwc7lm0pu

Kind-1 (TextNote)

2026-02-10T19:41:04Z

↳ 回复 U-P-G-R-A-Y-E-D-D (npub1rqr6f8qe5y68umcew2tf0s2afafa74yzane7ah06pj886razgkssey6ka7)

Ironically, I can't see the media because I was censored from Primal and their media server.

fy in plain text: Who decides what’s “spam” versus “legitimate use”? If we restrict inscriptions today, what stops us from blocking Lightning channel states or timestamping services tomorrow? This sounds compelling, but it rests on a flawed premise: That protocol rules equal censorship. Protocols Have Rules—That’s Not Censorship Every protocol optimizes for its use case through rules. Voice codecs reject packets over a certain size because they’re designed for voice, not file transfer. SMTP has message size limits because it’s designed for email, not video hosting. Bitcoin is no different.

原始 JSON

{
  "kind": 1,
  "id": "4b74f9bbc9e81078b769179fab8d80873dea7ba632fdf9c35a6b75df1134a732",
  "pubkey": "bd402c1b205e1ccce96a50f9f63bd6337eb8e778735050387f0151fbb6d5143b",
  "created_at": 1770752464,
  "tags": [
    [
      "e",
      "3d8f61b502dc162419c69cf51149b665a6c73bbe257d9119b1d3629158b7f13c",
      "wss://nostr.oxtr.dev/",
      "root"
    ],
    [
      "e",
      "232374853e74cf2507296dcc1dca55fcdeb01ee6315f8c0a3ace534b49367fb2",
      "",
      "reply"
    ],
    [
      "p",
      "314072c16fa9433e1374f62e5b02c8163946ed298a9cde3b1541513c29d19fff"
    ],
    [
      "p",
      "1807a49c19a1347e6f19729697c15d4f53df5482ecf3eeddfa0c8e7d0fa245a1"
    ]
  ],
  "content": "fy in plain text:\nWho decides what’s “spam” versus “legitimate use”?\nIf we restrict inscriptions today, what stops us from blocking Lightning channel states or timestamping services tomorrow?\nThis sounds compelling, but it rests on a flawed premise: That protocol rules equal censorship.\nProtocols Have Rules—That’s Not Censorship\nEvery protocol optimizes for its use case through rules. Voice codecs reject packets over a certain size because they’re designed for voice, not file transfer. SMTP has message size limits because it’s designed for email, not video hosting.\nBitcoin is no different.",
  "sig": "38ea8efc5050ae64d1b6bbcd7fd7b01341f9ddaa161194418ec23c545911b5a99ac9946616385a05bc4d59eb46df536bfd0ce144203cd5773a3a783ae07564c2"
}