Next scheduled rescrape ... never
Version 1
Last scraped
Scraped on 11/05/2025, 05:45:32 UTC
But in order for the ones that want to store a lot of info (I consider it spam), they are asking to use my computer to store their information/spam. Nowhere in any instance in society is there a requirement that others may use or abuse your property or use it for reasons you do not want it used.

Bitcoin is an opt-in system. Nobody is forcing you to run a bitcoin node. Furthermore, the blockchain is not "your property." You don't really have a right to dictate what it contains, or what it should contain. But if you want to run a node you aretake part ofin an implicit agreement to host the blockchain on your computer.

I don’t believe I should have to host spam - at a cost nonetheless- in order to use my permissionless money.

That's the thing: you don't have to. Its a decision you are making on your own accord.

As far as blockchain bloat and the risk of centralization is concerned, I am in 100% agreement with you.
Original archived Re: Removing OP_return limits seems like a huge mistake
Scraped on 11/05/2025, 05:40:42 UTC
But in order for the ones that want to store a lot of info (I consider it spam), they are asking to use my computer to store their information/spam. Nowhere in any instance in society is there a requirement that others may use or abuse your property or use it for reasons you do not want it used.

Bitcoin is an opt-in system. Nobody is forcing you to run a bitcoin node. Furthermore, the blockchain is not "your property." You don't really have a right to dictate what it contains, or what it should contain. But if you want to run a node you are part of an implicit agreement to host the blockchain on your computer.

I don’t believe I should have to host spam - at a cost nonetheless- in order to use my permissionless money.

That's the thing: you don't have to. Its a decision you are making on your own accord.