MINING POOLS THAT CENSOR BITCOIN TRANSACTIONS ARE AN ATTACK ON BITCOIN. ANY SELF RESPECTING MINER SHOULD NOT MINE WITH SUCH A POOL.
ON A POSITIVE NOTE, POOLS THAT DO NOT CENSOR WILL EARN MORE IN FEES. BITCOIN WORKING AS DESIGNED.
Thread
Login to reply
Replies ()
which pool is blocking coinjoins?
Ocean mining Luke trashjr and friends
No, this is a bug in Samourai's implementation.
Other conjoin implementations work fine afaik.
Is this accurate? Doesn't sound like a bug, but choice of allowed spec.
View quoted note →
It's a bug if they expected it to work under the 40 byte spec.
If they knowingly exceeded it... Then what are they complaining for? That's on them
40 byte was before taproot?
Out of curiosity, how does JoinMarket fare in these comparative discussions over OP_RETURN?
JoinMarket coinjoins work just fine in either setting or are they in same boat as Samurai here?
If JM is unaffected. Then does Samurai's different "setup" make these txns stick out like a sore thumb?
(Apologies for my non-techy understanding)
As far as I know, this is a Samourai only issue.
It doesn't make sense for coinjoins to dox themselves like this in the first place.
Sure one can identify a coinjoin tx onchain but it doesn’t dox anything other than being a coinjoin tx. One cannot tell which input/output belongs to who.
Honestly, dropping the ball on this one. You're sustaining a spam attack on Bitcoin this way, hurting its early adoption as money.
Bitcoiners are so trained against "censorship", they mistake everything for it. This can then be weaponized against them, by flooding the chain with spam and making it unusable for small users.
Do you consider nostr relays filtering token airdrop spam to be censorship? Because that's exactly the same thing. Relays have rules on what messages they relay, just like Bicoin nodes and miners already do. So Bitcoin is already "censoring" now.
If nodes decide to filter certain tx, then those will no longer be valid tx on the network. This has been the case since day one for tx that are too big, double spends, wrong coinbase tx, etc.
Wake up Neo, Bitcoin has been "censoring" since day one...
a few dollars / adoption for betraying the uncensorable property....hmmm, I'll pass thanks.
Quit larping and read my message again. Bitcoin is already "censoring". Bitcoin already has rules that "censor" certain tx.
Adding a spam filter is not the censorship you should fear, from the comfort of your cosy couch. Meanwhile people with less means that need Bitcoin more than you are priced out.
That's the adoption I mean. Not the dollar signs you think about when you hear the word adoption.
Another good reason to opt out of pools and decentralize more.
#Ocean is the #Pool I would use. I don't want any shady stuff..👍👏🧡😊
OLIGOPOLIES CONTROLLING MINING POOLS IS A PROBLEM. COMPETITION IS WELCOME EVEN IF IT MEANS ALTERNATIVES WITH DIFFERRING OPINIONS/TEMPLATES THAN WHAT YOU'D LIKE
(i love nostr)
If ordinals are utilizing a bug, the not including them is more like aworkaround than censorship.
Most miners will never see this msg and do not care. They just want the pool that earns them the most profit. Fortunately, these two things are aligned.
@jb55 can you add a fix-case filter? :-)