You assume modern spammers are cost-sensitive? They are not....

46fcbe3065eaf1ae...

npub1gm7tuvr9atc6u7q3gevjfeyfyvmrlul4y67k7u7hcxztz67ceexs078rf6

hex

a289886be9c1eab5b5554f4fff112f70cc933141d9924b79493ba806e62413f8

nevent

nevent1qqs29zvgd05ur644k4257nllzyhhpnynx9qanyjt09ynh2qxucjp87qprpmhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuem4d36kwatvw5hx6mm9qgsydl97xpj74udw0qg5vkfyujyjxd3l706jd0t0w0turp93d0vvungsk5gvw

Kind-1 (TextNote)

2026-02-10T21:31:37Z

↳ 回复 事件不存在

8b527a1473a02de2b947e4806c35ba16e9d0b762555d022dc1a4752c09af121b...

You assume modern spammers are cost-sensitive? They are not. They are hype-sensitive. High fees don't deter them. They validate the "asset" value and drive the FOMO cycles they rely on.

You also completely sidestepped the timescale mismatch. A consensus change like BIP110 takes months or years to activate safely. A spammer can change their encoding method in an afternoon. That is not "asymmetry favoring the defender". That is a losing battle by definition.

BIP110 asks us to risk catastrophic chain splits and break legitimate scripting utility (like OP_IF) just to play whack-a-mole with data that pays valid fees. If we normalize censoring transactions at the consensus level, we won't kill the spam - we’ll kill Bitcoin’s neutrality for a false sense of control.

原始 JSON

{
  "kind": 1,
  "id": "a289886be9c1eab5b5554f4fff112f70cc933141d9924b79493ba806e62413f8",
  "pubkey": "46fcbe3065eaf1ae7811465924e48923363ff3f526bd6f73d7c184b16bd8ce4d",
  "created_at": 1770759097,
  "tags": [
    [
      "e",
      "dfcea7e09ae2a5c2edad284f536419c79abf52604eb5cae76e3f895ed0f4b3eb",
      "wss://relay.primal.net/",
      "root",
      "846307688a09ec112967eb0544e78a9e88c48f50712c39ed491ff2b6fa019ae8"
    ],
    [
      "e",
      "8b527a1473a02de2b947e4806c35ba16e9d0b762555d022dc1a4752c09af121b",
      "wss://relay.primal.net/",
      "reply",
      "314072c16fa9433e1374f62e5b02c8163946ed298a9cde3b1541513c29d19fff"
    ],
    [
      "p",
      "846307688a09ec112967eb0544e78a9e88c48f50712c39ed491ff2b6fa019ae8"
    ],
    [
      "p",
      "314072c16fa9433e1374f62e5b02c8163946ed298a9cde3b1541513c29d19fff"
    ],
    [
      "client",
      "jumble"
    ]
  ],
  "content": "You assume modern spammers are cost-sensitive? They are not. They are hype-sensitive. High fees don't deter them. They validate the \"asset\" value and drive the FOMO cycles they rely on.\n\nYou also completely sidestepped the timescale mismatch. A consensus change like BIP110 takes months or years to activate safely. A spammer can change their encoding method in an afternoon. That is not \"asymmetry favoring the defender\". That is a losing battle by definition.\n\nBIP110 asks us to risk catastrophic chain splits and break legitimate scripting utility (like OP_IF) just to play whack-a-mole with data that pays valid fees. If we normalize censoring transactions at the consensus level, we won't kill the spam - we’ll kill Bitcoin’s neutrality for a false sense of control.",
  "sig": "939d1f3f98bf854ae6ee9889375d21899a621be5a76ffa8e8b9647d11eeb86be7cb0624494b943e03bb72b5d14dc8dcb1131dc3f11c9ed8e03981ad76c4b2925"
}