Quote from: BlackHatCoiner on Today at 11:19:01 AM

Quote from: n0nce on Today at 11:03:54 AM

So that's just one more reason not to store files on the blockchain.

Yeah, but fortunately or not, it's possible.

I'm just trying to figure out where this ethical concern starts and where it ends. It's unethical to upload a movie on-chain in plain text, okay (I personally disagree, in the same manner I don't feel guilty for other people's transactions). It's apparently not unethical to upload it unencrypted? Not until you find out what's in that encrypted file? How about links? Is it unethical to store an onion URL that points to a totally illegal place?

Putting censorship resistance above personal ethics is another thing I like about Bitcoin.

everytime you mention "censorship resistance" your doing it with the foolish notion of the buzzword whereby your thinking using doomads version of the word

get away from his notion

bitcoin has many consensus mechanisms requiring consent of the network to allow certain things. yes some rules have been softened. but the network is still a system of requiring consent to meet some rule
this is why trying to broadcast a litecoin transaction gets rejected, a tx of sat-dust amounts gets rejected, why a spent utxo gets rejected

pretending that bitcoin needs to be softened more to let anything in is a bad bad bad idea of braking bitcoin to allow anything in. becasue then there are no rules meaning double spends can happen and accepting litecoins into bitcoin and any altcoin tx into bitcoin which breaks the units of value measure supply rules and such

bitcoin is not a censorship resistance network. its as consensus network
nodes fully rules of whats acceptable

heck. if we remove consensus and allowed censorship resistance.. then CSW can drop in some 2009 utxo's and without the network consensus.. the "censorship resistance" buzzword you are idolising due to your girlfriend. will accept CSW spending old utxo because doomad wants a system where no data/transaction is rejected

..
bitcoin needs to be a strong consensus network needing consent of the masses on what transactions are acceptable. by defining whats acceptable. such as needing the uxto keypair owners consent (by signature) to move the utxo value..
and not doomads silly rule breaking ideology. where he has no understanding of consensus or consent

please for once get out of doomads head of his desires and think about bitcoins network security and the benefit for the masses of value security of a network designed as a consensus based payment network/. not doomads "censorship resistance" bloated meme library network!.