I would agree with you here. I think he had to put significant efforts into it, and I think it would be both harder and more expensive to make it BIP110 compatible.
So basically he's making two points:
- A motivated state actor will always be able to put contiguous csam on bitcoin if they decide to do so. — you just won't fix that.
- If we make it more expensive for spammers, we might end up in a situation where the spam becomes more damaging in order to get in anyway.
However, he's also showing that counter-measures make spamming significantly more difficult. The problem being, once someone writes and standardize a work-around, it becomes easy again (just more expensive).
Personally I would still favor easy/non-damaging counter-measures, but not as aggressive as BIP110 that will clearly come back to bite us.
npub10r…3625r
2026-02-28 04:25:27 UTC
in reply to nevent1q…ew4q
Author Public Key
npub10r37rgdjcj6yprg4fdayd58dqfxpwnr8u59nun45q4mfg3vajg0s63625rSeen on
wss://relay.damus.ioPublished at
2026-02-28 04:25:27 UTCEvent JSON
{
"id": "4361d84d478d7177c4f56fa164fdb06268bcc9ce335f89683dfe32a30298d427",
"pubkey": "78e3e1a1b2c4b4408d154b7a46d0ed024c174c67e50b3e4eb4057694459d921f",
"created_at": 1772252727,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"p",
"5143c373df1b548a77d79ec74f27255d129b695b522dfb5bf43498ba4b501df9",
"",
"mention"
],
[
"p",
"945b9d23b2f3e4d1977c4be60515ce0c22e019a01451ecd33af1080e5e7a40ed",
"",
"mention"
],
[
"p",
"78e3e1a1b2c4b4408d154b7a46d0ed024c174c67e50b3e4eb4057694459d921f",
"",
"mention"
],
[
"p",
"dd1f9d502c7951df47e8f8ed245e8bfa24f7e82c28f19399a8f0e74b06113a21",
"",
"mention"
],
[
"e",
"240d47c9d785892c9b23ac3bc4f7372146511c31a5b3148aa89349b514a21be4",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"207745be5138070c6f3a0ffb9fe195fe7839046007e886a6c3ccb2f64cbb815f",
"",
"reply"
]
],
"content": "I would agree with you here. I think he had to put significant efforts into it, and I think it would be both harder and more expensive to make it BIP110 compatible. \n\nSo basically he's making two points:\n- A motivated state actor will always be able to put contiguous csam on bitcoin if they decide to do so. — you just won't fix that.\n- If we make it more expensive for spammers, we might end up in a situation where the spam becomes more damaging in order to get in anyway.\n\nHowever, he's also showing that counter-measures make spamming significantly more difficult. The problem being, once someone writes and standardize a work-around, it becomes easy again (just more expensive).\n\nPersonally I would still favor easy/non-damaging counter-measures, but not as aggressive as BIP110 that will clearly come back to bite us.",
"sig": "18c34a609c9c32524612ef07c374bee7dd3ed35c8a0c58b6d0f028e8e9ef62825ac1cf0410d5dc7dbfe1f4defcfb5bc6e1c72e9467dff508a6033f223ffc88ad"
}