path: root/e3/a9299460ea7815967f6459a2bec630f1d3d595

Delivery-date: Thu, 25 Sep 2025 19:47:05 -0700
Received: from mail-oa1-f61.google.com ([209.85.160.61])
	by mail.fairlystable.org with esmtps  (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256
	(Exim 4.94.2)
	(envelope-from <bitcoindev+bncBC2JVH7GSAMBBHP527DAMGQE5WZQL7Y@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1v1yUB-0002K4-Hl
	for bitcoindev@gnusha.org; Thu, 25 Sep 2025 19:47:05 -0700
Received: by mail-oa1-f61.google.com with SMTP id 586e51a60fabf-3641593a391sf1681007fac.3
        for <bitcoindev@gnusha.org>; Thu, 25 Sep 2025 19:47:03 -0700 (PDT)
ARC-Seal: i=2; a=rsa-sha256; t=1758854818; cv=pass;
        d=google.com; s=arc-20240605;
        b=bIiCViBmMGc+PMNjnxNGJs8GGOlhF1ut1TUcXVu75H9PWmVK9pM7lzDEkqWlGs+KIZ
         rXyjTe+tBxMY9vnVxCX/vF13RRBOFHQRMyqRKtECHuZiMNT5cTY59mDR1S5/Zzlgv4cq
         6g4xtmYOWtPohfhegAX40LwP0h076QfkrAi1LkYJxRGmPa7/CWZ3QcYycG7MsBzN802A
         6H1mMFvPl66PFVzrtPDWHw4Pej9dLJwyAO4F+vyDNwivp0twqYYg0iUJY0vu8U0Fj9rG
         qNihweh9R2ZE+udsYcSqykP6mzbPBbOFVeeFUmrXbJQ+PEZiCsezlhi4cNytNPBDx8l6
         vWYw==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=2; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20240605;
        h=list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-help:list-post
         :list-id:mailing-list:precedence:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from
         :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:sender:dkim-signature;
        bh=cq/TO4aXvZnbj3nW3Fgy80P4Y/wMeTYSuZnmi/LO0+o=;
        fh=s0YZl4WG7vnMLZ6g4JT4GtFyWCHyx1ZWWZWb4vlYnKo=;
        b=ft98qo+kxkRL/a5o+oNg4p/YYLNz4nrV4FVrZnybge3nGDnfALpVRj9okrPtimhZDm
         5ExqGDrKPj3DUoKkOjhCVH3pEw8eqOe4ILOLUcw8W3SNjS9hiiRVkzsWCilffxi8IUoX
         Ms0xZvTh0g9o3mn/QS2BnoFy9vBFQF3iUkGcnRXNNflRCUHpSswEfRFYGZStZUSbukD1
         c4FYEAbm4DHtH10HlNHaMcaQ8GD1qlH6kijPTZFpgC38s1+Ow3nn1ncrVLH+5Ro6k+99
         UMH8JssOuCnBFO8N397/wTqZvEU79RC3p2Ql00S+LmjUCL0BHn1Nq1Nigkbc6l4Lh703
         1SPA==;
        darn=gnusha.org
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=2; gmr-mx.google.com;
       spf=pass (google.com: domain of gagglehoof@gmail.com designates 209.85.218.44 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=gagglehoof@gmail.com;
       dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=drbonez.dev
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=googlegroups.com; s=20230601; t=1758854818; x=1759459618; darn=gnusha.org;
        h=list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-help:list-post
         :list-id:mailing-list:precedence:x-original-authentication-results
         :x-original-sender:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to
         :references:mime-version:sender:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id
         :reply-to;
        bh=cq/TO4aXvZnbj3nW3Fgy80P4Y/wMeTYSuZnmi/LO0+o=;
        b=vTmaIA3HFZtDcGtkbZsX373VK1Hl6T6R8jFjTzwL+/upD4UVeITgPd1qCO10nGUHYD
         r7p88d0SOQhTOY5QziI464n/8BBQF3hxyXbcvOqftYlmfrecC0wT1QwgKmc0zxmLhIWV
         70MH2HDKsgv59BKKRI2tqD3GHOTKdRBDcfMh9DjhpirO3TxxNRtdp8kOIsxCW8xmrJBS
         IKu/ObkaJf0U6bjmBFVksEscXoGi3CgMPCZ45bwUKCk2IfNTn2DcQ3aeX2RoznpWAvcs
         Sd6tRZDz/JFFoFQQqXmpa6JTQ4Er8GYiW6mhFOJSOYf2MqqGjWG2tfLdKN/6c4Glolcl
         rqow==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1758854818; x=1759459618;
        h=list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-help:list-post
         :list-id:mailing-list:precedence:x-original-authentication-results
         :x-original-sender:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to
         :references:mime-version:x-beenthere:x-gm-message-state:sender:from
         :to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
        bh=cq/TO4aXvZnbj3nW3Fgy80P4Y/wMeTYSuZnmi/LO0+o=;
        b=Vcd/NUzVCJB+WnVjG4b3y4/hbO4akkcTLqU4PCxC98o5iyYvApayPqXaGvcTPN0v/4
         xCgFjoD8NIJPDI3h9PnjyZzt/pY+OSrDNvO0lcol710x9hvsKfArJS46hhZ1AaWxjEuE
         RretceQ9UOfEmMHHnsaxwJIUOVI0NipErMTu+cqj4Rvpsy3MgQgbP7MLoSq1lzUWdIvG
         qY0wMsAuSta0+dk0WlykexA4P67joB9qEhiM9d/qBnK/TAj9Ij0gthpfIhfHXskgyQuc
         3J5Qf2ikCx+PIN7VOjKrgM8xcEnRPfMQmjvKaWR8oECFVfXkeopNd+vpbBAYO32pJwZd
         bCeg==
Sender: bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=2; AJvYcCVhmeec58iT8yBrE6sUF1PSMG0eb+Nldkt6e9vYNkTiLPXX7dpIV+ymrIjkOe8uiHYozlb/mZYqRFrk@gnusha.org
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwRtgN2BOmUMPDNUoqNbMhuPTXV32DOljp1gFmfMxaTQy9ZxaKg
	7FPSXkSdiE1lW4n73RCzVWxgXetiYlHFzwLrJiVaVGrqMjLL6gXMe/Sx
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IE5GbcxKzXEr+8OBsu05+wPWSIRMym6rL9zQ8iN19x19zoxUpnS5aIOgfAvEDLcVw3XJw4eeA==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:687c:2186:b0:344:5013:4bfc with SMTP id 586e51a60fabf-35eec476397mr2898713fac.43.1758854817306;
        Thu, 25 Sep 2025 19:46:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: bitcoindev@googlegroups.com; h="ARHlJd4Wgg0KXfhLeEhiHUITItiR2sLdAxNPNHxNXJ/xQ83H6Q=="
Received: by 2002:a05:6871:3a09:b0:319:c62c:c8e0 with SMTP id
 586e51a60fabf-35ec120e0c1ls936267fac.0.-pod-prod-07-us; Thu, 25 Sep 2025
 19:46:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=2; AJvYcCUAmKmTIhMCWOFmCpP1Xb88yTjKoB5tB8wjSfWcgXtR/B1erd0Q2iS2/TiDtPsN7CH42HEdIrTsqSPm@googlegroups.com
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:1825:b0:43b:55c9:3a2d with SMTP id 5614622812f47-43f4cf31340mr2862305b6e.27.1758854813394;
        Thu, 25 Sep 2025 19:46:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 2002:a05:6504:604b:b0:2c0:aeab:e1f7 with SMTP id a1c4a302cd1d6-2c8266c4d25msc7a;
        Thu, 25 Sep 2025 19:17:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=2; AJvYcCV1xN6eV8UkxZ1sjLKVIjuqBTN0ZgHV2JA1UiJtaMtxeBuNs2jG08q1haZFRYgeeiXiMFL3qvmJRnUv@googlegroups.com
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:3d10:b0:57a:6d7d:dd7b with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-582d092f0f7mr1582885e87.8.1758853049448;
        Thu, 25 Sep 2025 19:17:29 -0700 (PDT)
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1758853049; cv=none;
        d=google.com; s=arc-20240605;
        b=NcLt6zPqyTNOsiwnk9pdvZazwtODSc8fFQf6gF3EvFCIumcLNAeBsWMKzIliUhYfo0
         wokTiloZjcOqviEra0iGiVGcUPuIJv6cLyci27ycQjFCtEnW7H43RbFhsGyy84WlGgE9
         ljm6yo11kef8x9Xrnx8bvZr+CXUhgsp3gpgkLaKEAl4KYYyW/8ofNSs7Z73RVwPwgd5C
         oJQng+QQQd9hmYVJ+bwmpn+5RvdAewqL6nZssMAHVwe+5MUsoX+IXtYD+yBTHSezY6BA
         25WjaVxBDbDUaWP7FnXrO82qv2Hgg5rZvkWFfPbBgbs4OvQXps7ljr2HVKFwd4JzJaoC
         7Z3g==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20240605;
        h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references
         :mime-version;
        bh=+t2SLpFnu8rSUEtJqLdl3BeCASghim4mf3xYi+VXgzE=;
        fh=Pdo+jSc90GtFeVdnJPqlqJQLWHrihkxv7GxwaVVHAcI=;
        b=HSxdwa9r5soLISE+Mdaku40yYeBIpxB+iuteQQkOa3Ftzvkfie7sNFrsYzzLuUKB4J
         7Mkyc3sa06hgeC+7us50NffzH+RD9SpwM0ZZBNcVJiER+kIIgreRhKAlbQucDYj1xMmP
         aBxhwq81XUuxZkrdKyRyzIuKpb6Ry15SowETmMLN28aulJdjRJRMZFGMGkXPpL6RTNnM
         9dqXt7htoclMJnmP3cHf9KZYpWjycwUc01jPUbI5HcfUuPQjTgtdzg0P+r6Kt6o5GQLX
         L+UyZuWIhI7NWYR9XifeRh2gX2VVYTG2s7/RjYMnYHeoEtocfk/H7KbQWm+pCFcrvGni
         ZJ0g==;
        dara=google.com
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; gmr-mx.google.com;
       spf=pass (google.com: domain of gagglehoof@gmail.com designates 209.85.218.44 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=gagglehoof@gmail.com;
       dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=drbonez.dev
Received: from mail-ej1-f44.google.com (mail-ej1-f44.google.com. [209.85.218.44])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 2adb3069b0e04-583170ecb41si60703e87.7.2025.09.25.19.17.29
        for <bitcoindev@googlegroups.com>
        (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128);
        Thu, 25 Sep 2025 19:17:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of gagglehoof@gmail.com designates 209.85.218.44 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.218.44;
Received: by mail-ej1-f44.google.com with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-b2ef8e00becso335210766b.0
        for <bitcoindev@googlegroups.com>; Thu, 25 Sep 2025 19:17:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCVrvQIIprMSaCq6WZHgMADx+wGBLG9NZLsp571m7nyenwy7mEoWZXzmXAXGyMpAsW4NxIfNhKRjmG+I@googlegroups.com
X-Gm-Gg: ASbGnctEbTQuZl4pzH7sAFfsPbGrUAkuTx18Z1k+V2pXrz5SpjbeE0UhLGGbU8IaQPr
	LQiq3GzUjXZnRa760Q//reIxOrUQ3J0CFqtDQXlj4p0NhYCEuIvDhQ2Kdl+ipfWK/NH6oWP5asn
	FUK4J/bgy+WvZ1KLzpQnOdLTWNT9vGpzgCur663bl8h70mf7fvsk6Vr4xVhlJHY3p8++F2bY4b6
	xVGIBFTXl2U57fN3sjmpRxjwOmsnAHiwrv0mhsCA2IRqGZYH/FeD4g3RtrxKSOrMK1UzW+eS+bw
	908Sq8AldHmg1HgL3JE36NCnSEQx0egnMzwm3GER/yK1xwdN/2EwJ7dno2MXVP5bBzFC6E9j9rQ
	EB6vUUHtEIPHl7jwIMV/vXK4m0bUuo8zkYIQ4aEenWWA+TxsnYgWuqpABkR+aIxxjkayhUgw=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:8689:b0:b07:de2c:1268 with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-b34ba147a5fmr525746566b.5.1758853048468;
        Thu, 25 Sep 2025 19:17:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ej1-f45.google.com (mail-ej1-f45.google.com. [209.85.218.45])
        by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-634a3ae3112sm2026362a12.25.2025.09.25.19.17.27
        for <bitcoindev@googlegroups.com>
        (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128);
        Thu, 25 Sep 2025 19:17:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ej1-f45.google.com with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-b256c8ca246so326935666b.1
        for <bitcoindev@googlegroups.com>; Thu, 25 Sep 2025 19:17:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCU4mljjvmlv/Oy/bNFoj+I7AZYVyZcVHQdbhpie3iUZXPuu6BU0kFa54K+0B7EvWVSt659OfsaYAz85@googlegroups.com
X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:c150:b0:af9:eace:8a52 with SMTP id
 a640c23a62f3a-b34be8c4a31mr607335666b.50.1758853046974; Thu, 25 Sep 2025
 19:17:26 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <cbdab6fa-93bc-44c9-80f0-6c68c6554f56n@googlegroups.com>
 <CAAS2fgRFP+BJUZR7h01=7=qamD5qEW6OYJikTMR=5RkxTCEMZg@mail.gmail.com>
 <de4dae19-86f4-4d7a-a895-b48664babbfcn@googlegroups.com> <CAAS2fgRABqRe1j6xzW0uhVrDiQnL6x1X6ALzfsJ7w4GztWVeNA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPDT2SRyVY4rh=HegG+kk5nnDf6qzYuRkUyxCC8iE-ydsh63ew@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAAS2fgSmiKhmQGAEo2eSQJmen-4kT1vD7dY8UESV4dQrjXau7w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOSz24TJU-4Q76MtzL+oYYFpXQvrOay5XtdrR0DxVBUAFz=5og@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAAS2fgRGCbNNxGHbSy1Ej3Kr9EnYDa5TYrVTCsfFsMnCbjYcfQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOSz24SdZeV=1PwDeXfoMgY7QbcfYkLysnGdqSWVrnRzqvHSOg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAAS2fgSXX5_TU86r=QOQAvg84tpRa7o9ha5=En3tPmTUBrrqhw@mail.gmail.com> <CAL5BAw2E2nupsgrZE6z2T2Fd4VWnF-NvPOZXXaOtbOLHSTWi-g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAL5BAw2E2nupsgrZE6z2T2Fd4VWnF-NvPOZXXaOtbOLHSTWi-g@mail.gmail.com>
From: Aiden McClelland <me@drbonez.dev>
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2025 20:17:14 -0600
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CAOSz24SZ9x_c=3eXY0McxQbivbG5zHOfTiaZjR+=uAju4+pC3Q@mail.gmail.com>
X-Gm-Features: AS18NWAulqT8WJvJ4YaPp6woXzTqu9_CkKXxVuk8UYS3Ev9dx5UTSS5NXMX8bRk
Message-ID: <CAOSz24SZ9x_c=3eXY0McxQbivbG5zHOfTiaZjR+=uAju4+pC3Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [bitcoindev] [BIP Proposal] Mempool Validation and Relay Policies
 via User-Defined Scripts
To: Chris Riley <criley@gmail.com>
Cc: Greg Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>, yes_please <caucasianjazz12@gmail.com>, 
	Bitcoin Development Mailing List <bitcoindev@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000013c04e063faae3d2"
X-Original-Sender: me@drbonez.dev
X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com;       spf=pass
 (google.com: domain of gagglehoof@gmail.com designates 209.85.218.44 as
 permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=gagglehoof@gmail.com;       dmarc=fail
 (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=drbonez.dev
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list bitcoindev@googlegroups.com; contact bitcoindev+owners@googlegroups.com
List-ID: <bitcoindev.googlegroups.com>
X-Google-Group-Id: 786775582512
List-Post: <https://groups.google.com/group/bitcoindev/post>, <mailto:bitcoindev@googlegroups.com>
List-Help: <https://groups.google.com/support/>, <mailto:bitcoindev+help@googlegroups.com>
List-Archive: <https://groups.google.com/group/bitcoindev
List-Subscribe: <https://groups.google.com/group/bitcoindev/subscribe>, <mailto:bitcoindev+subscribe@googlegroups.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:googlegroups-manage+786775582512+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>,
 <https://groups.google.com/group/bitcoindev/subscribe>
X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)

--00000000000013c04e063faae3d2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Chris,

Can you elaborate further on what economic incentives there would be
towards filter standardization?

Thanks,
*Aiden McClelland*

On Thu, Sep 25, 2025, 8:06=E2=80=AFPM Chris Riley <criley@gmail.com> wrote:

> One concern is that even if filter scripts are local and opt-in initially=
,
> social or economic pressure will push them toward "standardization"=E2=80=
=94and
> from there toward implicit coercion=E2=80=94so the risk of soft censorshi=
p
> increases over time. If relay policies start drifting, the mempool ceases
> to reflect miner behavior and fragments into incompatible local views,
> undermining its role as a shared substrate. Instead of decentralizing
> control, filter modules may simply externalize it: those who author
> =E2=80=9Cpopular=E2=80=9D (perhaps through demagoguery) filters gain outs=
ized influence
> over what the rest see. The path to robustness is not more policy layers,
> but maintaining a minimal, common relay system.
>
> On Thu, Sep 25, 2025 at 6:29=E2=80=AFPM Greg Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>=
 wrote:
>
>> "There are levels of survival we are prepared to accept."
>>
>> Black and white thinking is not very helpful here particularly because
>> the goals of pro-filtering and anti-censorship aren't exact opposites.
>>
>> A widely censored world would greatly degrade the value of
>> Bitcoin, particularly if the censors managed to enlist significant miner=
s.
>> It would be routed around at great cost, and with much less freedom
>> provided for the world.  But just like people continue to buy racy
>> magazines or other completely lawful targets of operation chokepoint wit=
h
>> USD, people would still route around Bitcoin censorship.   But why even =
use
>> Bitcoin if it's in a similar space of your transactions being capricious=
ly
>> blocks, your funds frozen, etc. as exists with legacy infrastructure?
>>
>> But the irony is that the traffic that people most desperately want to
>> stop would be among the least impeded-- already today the spam traffic
>> exists at all because it's well funded (or really existed a year ago, we
>> are long past the huge spam floods-- they were depleted by costs and
>> fizzled as predicted-- and Ocean Mining is fighting yesterday's battle. =
But
>> what exists exists because its well funded).  Meanwhile joe blow sending
>> funds p2p to friends or family in far off places doesn't have the funds =
or
>> technical acumen to deal with censorship potentially targeting him, his
>> activities, or his payees.  The effect of censorship is basically to
>> require people to learn how to be money launderers to freely transact, a=
nd
>> those who don't suffer.
>>
>> The case is even stronger re: the recently filtering arguments because
>> unlike some consensus rule anyone can just mine a block (rent hashpower,
>> you don't have to own it) or even more so the stuff like op_return limit=
s
>> have long been bypassed by major miners.  So the policy restriction was
>> already not working.   So in some sense there are arguments getting
>> conflated:  The op_return policy limit has already failed.  So when peop=
le
>> point out that it doesn't work it's just a statement of fact rather than
>> speculation.  But basically the 'bad' traffic has a lot easier time than
>> more innocent traffic, which is part of why filters can be both ineffect=
ive
>> and dangerous.  It's also the case that existing filter efforts are not
>> backed by civil litigation or state mandates, but building infrastructur=
e
>> creates an obvious stepping stone to that (in part because of the
>> insufficient effectiveness of filtering)-- it's just a bad road that wil=
l
>> almost inevitably lead to more escalations.   Bitcoin is just better of
>> adopting the position that other people's transactions aren't our busine=
ss,
>> even if they're stupid or drive fees up a bit for some periods and creat=
e
>> annoyances, because the alternative is easily much worse.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 25, 2025 at 9:26=E2=80=AFPM Aiden McClelland <me@drbonez.dev=
> wrote:
>>
>>> >I have no idea what you're referring to there.
>>>
>>> It's something I inferred from your primary argument that seems to be
>>> that user-configurable filters are bad because they would cause censors=
hip.
>>> But it also sounds like you're saying such filters are completely
>>> ineffective at any sort of censorship at all. I don't really understand=
 how
>>> these two viewpoints can coexist. What am I missing here?
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> *Aiden McClelland*
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 25, 2025, 3:14=E2=80=AFPM Greg Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>=
 wrote:
>>>
>>>> I am not a core developer. I have not been for some eight years now.
>>>>
>>>> > that you yourself are worried they will reach the 80% needed
>>>>
>>>> I have no idea what you're referring to there.  If lots of people run
>>>> nodes that screw up propagation they'll be routed around.  I developed=
 the
>>>> technical concepts required to get nearly 100% tx coverage even if alm=
ost
>>>> all nodes are blocking them quite a few years ago (
>>>> https://arxiv.org/pdf/1905.10518 ), but deployment of the
>>>> implementation has gone slow due to other factors (you know, such as t=
he
>>>> most experienced developers being hit with billions of dollars in laws=
uits
>>>> as a cost for their support of Bitcoin)... I expect if censoring actua=
lly
>>>> becomes widespread that technological improvements which further moot =
it
>>>> will be developed.
>>>>
>>>> These are just vulnerabilities that should be closed anyways-- after
>>>> all anyone at any time can just spin up any number of "nodes" that beh=
ave
>>>> in arbitrary ways, at ant time.  It's been a lower priority because th=
ere
>>>> are other countermeasures (addnode-a-friend, manually setbanning bad p=
eers,
>>>> etc.) and aforementione distractions.
>>>>
>>>> > censorship due to widespread use of transaction filters is a bad
>>>> thing (I'm not really taking a stance on that right now).
>>>>
>>>> I would point you to the history of discussion on Bitcoin starting bac=
k
>>>> with Satoshi's earliest announcements, and perhaps to help you underst=
and
>>>> that if you want that what you want isn't bitcoin.  If after considera=
tion
>>>> you don't think censorship wouldn't be very bad, then really you and I=
 have
>>>> nothing further to discuss.
>>>>
>>>> > are you willing to work with and compromise with people who are
>>>> looking for a solution like this? Or are you going to force them to ab=
andon
>>>> the Core project entirely
>>>>
>>>> I don't really think there is any space to compromise with people who
>>>> think it's okay to add censorship to Bitcoin-- I mean sure whatever ex=
act
>>>> relay policy there is there is plenty of tradeoffs but from the start =
of
>>>> this new filter debate the filter proponents have immediately come out=
 with
>>>> vile insults accusing developers of promoting child sexual abuse and
>>>> shitcoins and what not----  that isn't some attempt to navigate a
>>>> technical/political trademark, it's an effort to villify and destory t=
he
>>>> opposition.   And unambiguously so as luke has said outright that his =
goal
>>>> is to destroy Bitcoin Core.  So what's the compromise there?
>>>>
>>>> > Or even worse still, felt compelled to coordinate a UASF to block
>>>> these transactions entirely?
>>>>
>>>> I very much think people should do that-- they should actually make
>>>> some consensus rules for their filters to fork off and we can see what=
 the
>>>> market thinks.  -- And also even if the market prefers censored Bitcoi=
n,
>>>> that's also fine with me, in the sense in my view Bitcoin was created =
to be
>>>> money as largely free from human judgement as possible.  When it was
>>>> created most of the world was doing something else and didn't know the=
y
>>>> needed freedom money.  If it's still the case that most of the world
>>>> doesn't want freedom money that would be no shock. They should be free=
 to
>>>> have what they want and people who want freedom money should be free t=
o
>>>> have what they want.  I got into bitcoin before it was worth practical=
ly
>>>> anything because of the freedom it provides, and I think that's paramo=
unt.
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps you should consider why they *don't* do that?  I'd say it's
>>>> because (1) it won't work, and (2) it's not actually what the world wa=
nts--
>>>> an outspoken influence campaign is not necessarily all that reflective=
 of
>>>> much of anything.  Particularly given how inaccurate and emotionally
>>>> pandering the filter advocacy has been.   But, hey, I've been wrong
>>>> before.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Sep 25, 2025 at 8:51=E2=80=AFPM Aiden McClelland <me@drbonez.d=
ev>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Greg,
>>>>>
>>>>> Let me assume for a minute, for the sake of argument, that I agree
>>>>> that transaction censorship due to widespread use of transaction filt=
ers is
>>>>> a bad thing (I'm not really taking a stance on that right now). It is=
 an
>>>>> irrefutable fact that a very large portion of the user base wants to =
filter
>>>>> transactions. So many so, that you yourself are worried they will rea=
ch the
>>>>> 80% needed to prevent certain types of transactions from propogating.
>>>>> Wouldn't it then be *worse* if these 80% of users went and ran an
>>>>> alternative implementation, most likely written by it's most radical
>>>>> supporters? Or even worse still, felt compelled to coordinate a UASF =
to
>>>>> block these transactions entirely?
>>>>>
>>>>> I at no point intended to insinuate that you or any other core
>>>>> contributer be compelled to implement a proposal like this. It's up t=
o its
>>>>> supporters to do so. The real question is, are you willing to work wi=
th and
>>>>> compromise with people who are looking for a solution like this? Or a=
re you
>>>>> going to force them to abandon the Core project entirely?
>>>>>
>>>>> Best,
>>>>> *Aiden McClelland*
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Sep 25, 2025, 2:03=E2=80=AFPM Greg Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.co=
m> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> > 1) Allowing node
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Who said anything about allowing?  Everyone is allowed to do whateve=
r
>>>>>> they want.  Drill a hole in your head if you like, not my concern.  =
None of
>>>>>> this thread is about what people are allowed to do-- that's off the =
table.
>>>>>> The design and licensing of Bitcoin is such that no one gets to stop=
 anyone
>>>>>> else from what they want to do anyways (which is, in fact, a big par=
t of
>>>>>> the issue here).   To think otherwise is to be stuck in a kind of se=
rf
>>>>>> thinking where you can only do what other people allow you to do.  T=
hat has
>>>>>> never been what Bitcoin was about.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Rather, the question is should people who care about Bitcoin spend
>>>>>> their time and money developing infrastructure that would be useful,=
 even
>>>>>> primarily useful, for censorship.  I say no.  Especially because any=
 time
>>>>>> spent on it is time away from anti-censorship pro-privacy tools and =
because
>>>>>> the effort spent doing so would undermine anti-censorship and pro-pr=
ivacy
>>>>>> efforts because they would inevitably moot the efforts expected gett=
ing
>>>>>> into peoples business and filtering their transactions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You don't have to agree, and you're free to do your own thing just a=
s
>>>>>> I'm free to say that I think it's a bad direction.  From the very be=
ginning
>>>>>> Bitcoin has stood against the freedom to transact being overridden
>>>>>> by some admin based on their judgment call weighing principles again=
st
>>>>>> other concerns, or at the behest of their superiors.  So many Bitcoi=
ner
>>>>>> will stand against, route around, and do what they can do to make
>>>>>> ineffectual the blocking of consensual transactions.  It might not s=
eem as
>>>>>> many at the moment, but the pro-privacy and anti-censorship 'side' d=
oesn't
>>>>>> have a paid PR and influence campaign,  but it also doesn't matter s=
o much
>>>>>> because Bitcoin takes advantage of the nature of information being e=
asy to
>>>>>> spread and hard to stifel and it doesn't that that huge an effort to=
 route
>>>>>> around censorship efforts.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There are elements of anti-censorship in Bitcoin that have been so
>>>>>> far underdeveloped.  It's unfortunate that their further development=
 might
>>>>>> be forced at a time when efforts are needed on other areas.  But per=
haps
>>>>>> they wouldn't get done without a concrete motivation. Such is life.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 25, 2025 at 9:21=E2=80=AFAM yes_please <caucasianjazz12@=
gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sorry Greg, could you please elaborate further on your ideas? Some
>>>>>>> are not exactly clear:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1) Allowing node runners to configure their node as they please and
>>>>>>> refuse to relay some txs is considered authoritarian, censorship, a=
nd an
>>>>>>> attempt to regulate third parties conduct. On the other hand, forci=
ng nodes
>>>>>>> to merge towards a single shared configuration (by preventing them =
to block
>>>>>>> txs) is not considered authoritarian because this imposition does n=
ot
>>>>>>> discriminate towards any txs and is thus non-authoritarian? Did I g=
et the
>>>>>>> reasoning correctly here?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2) If the aim is to have a homogenous mempool state and to model
>>>>>>> what will get mined, shouldn=E2=80=99t we reach this state through =
distributed
>>>>>>> independent nodes who decide independently on what they prefer this
>>>>>>> homogenous state to be? If we don=E2=80=99t reach this state throug=
h this
>>>>>>> distributed/independent mechanism, then how are we to reach this st=
ate? Who
>>>>>>> gets to decide and steer the direction so that we all converge towa=
rds this
>>>>>>> homogenous state?  One of the strongest aspects of bitcoin is the f=
act that
>>>>>>> no single party can force a change/direction, and the network has t=
o
>>>>>>> somehow reach a shared agreement through independent decision maker=
s who
>>>>>>> act in what manner they think is best. The proposed BIP seems to be=
 aligned
>>>>>>> with such a principle, I fail to see any authoritarian aspect here.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 3) I share your sentiment and the aim to have a homogenous mempool
>>>>>>> state, but I am skeptical of the manner in which we are to achieve =
this
>>>>>>> according to the ideas you have here expressed (namely not through =
a
>>>>>>> distributed independent organic manner)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Respectfully, yes_please
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 25, 2025 at 12:50=E2=80=AFAM Greg Maxwell <gmaxwell@gma=
il.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So that when the "consistent state" changes as a result of some
>>>>>>>> issue you can update configs instead of having to update software-=
- which
>>>>>>>> has considerable more costs and risks, especially if you're carryi=
ng local
>>>>>>>> customizations as many miners do.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 24, 2025 at 8:47=E2=80=AFPM Aiden McClelland <me@drbon=
ez.dev>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If mempool consistency across the network is all that is
>>>>>>>>> important, why allow any configuration of mempool relay policies =
at all?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, September 24, 2025 at 12:47:28=E2=80=AFPM UTC-6 Gre=
g Maxwell
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> This appears to substantially misunderstands the purpose of the
>>>>>>>>>> mempool broadly in the network-- it's purpose is to model what w=
ill get
>>>>>>>>>> mined.  If you're not doing that you might as well set blocks on=
ly.
>>>>>>>>>> Significant discrepancies are harmful to the system and promote
>>>>>>>>>> centralization and fail to achieve a useful purpose in any case.=
  What
>>>>>>>>>> marginal benefits might be provided do not justify building and =
deploying
>>>>>>>>>> the technological infrastructure for massive censorship.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> If you think this is important, I advise you to select another
>>>>>>>>>> cryptocurrency which is compatible with such authoritarian leani=
ngs.  --
>>>>>>>>>> though I am unsure if any exist since it is such a transparently=
 pointless
>>>>>>>>>> direction.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 24, 2025 at 6:30=E2=80=AFPM Aiden McClelland <
>>>>>>>>>> m...@drbonez.dev> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I'd like to share for discussion a draft BIP to allow for a
>>>>>>>>>>> modular mempool/relay policy:
>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/1985
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I think it could potentially reduce conflict within the
>>>>>>>>>>> community around relay policy, as an alternative to running lot=
s of
>>>>>>>>>>> different node implementations/forks when there are disagreemen=
ts.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I am working on a reference implementation using Bellard's
>>>>>>>>>>> QuickJS, but it has been almost a decade since I've written C++=
, so it's
>>>>>>>>>>> slow going and I'm sure doesn't follow best-practices. Once it'=
s working,
>>>>>>>>>>> it can be cleaned up.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>> Aiden McClelland
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the
>>>>>>>>>>> Google Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from
>>>>>>>>>>> it, send an email to bitcoindev+...@googlegroups.com.
>>>>>>>>>>> To view this discussion visit
>>>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/cbdab6fa-93bc-44c9=
-80f0-6c68c6554f56n%40googlegroups.com
>>>>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/cbdab6fa-93bc-44c=
9-80f0-6c68c6554f56n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=3Demail&utm_source=3Dfoo=
ter>
>>>>>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Googl=
e
>>>>>>>>> Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
>>>>>>>>> send an email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>>>>>>>>> To view this discussion visit
>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/de4dae19-86f4-4d7a-a=
895-b48664babbfcn%40googlegroups.com
>>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/de4dae19-86f4-4d7a-=
a895-b48664babbfcn%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=3Demail&utm_source=3Dfoote=
r>
>>>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>>>>>> Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
>>>>>>>> send an email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>>>>>>>> To view this discussion visit
>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/CAAS2fgRABqRe1j6xzW0u=
hVrDiQnL6x1X6ALzfsJ7w4GztWVeNA%40mail.gmail.com
>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/CAAS2fgRABqRe1j6xzW0=
uhVrDiQnL6x1X6ALzfsJ7w4GztWVeNA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=3Demail&utm_sou=
rce=3Dfooter>
>>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Group=
s
>> "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send a=
n
>> email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>> To view this discussion visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/CAAS2fgSXX5_TU86r%3DQOQAvg8=
4tpRa7o9ha5%3DEn3tPmTUBrrqhw%40mail.gmail.com
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/CAAS2fgSXX5_TU86r%3DQOQAvg=
84tpRa7o9ha5%3DEn3tPmTUBrrqhw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=3Demail&utm_sourc=
e=3Dfooter>
>> .
>>
>

--=20
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/=
CAOSz24SZ9x_c%3D3eXY0McxQbivbG5zHOfTiaZjR%2B%3DuAju4%2BpC3Q%40mail.gmail.co=
m.

--00000000000013c04e063faae3d2
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"auto"><div>Chris,=C2=A0</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div d=
ir=3D"auto">Can you elaborate further on what economic incentives there wou=
ld be towards filter standardization?</div><div><br></div><div dir=3D"auto"=
>Thanks,</div><div data-smartmail=3D"gmail_signature"><font face=3D"courier=
 new, monospace"><b>Aiden McClelland</b></font></div></div><br><div class=
=3D"gmail_quote gmail_quote_container"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr=
">On Thu, Sep 25, 2025, 8:06=E2=80=AFPM Chris Riley &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:c=
riley@gmail.com">criley@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=
=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rg=
b(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr">One concern is that even =
if filter scripts are local and opt-in initially, social or economic pressu=
re will push them toward &quot;standardization&quot;=E2=80=94and from there=
 toward implicit coercion=E2=80=94so the risk of soft censorship increases =
over time. If relay policies start drifting, the mempool ceases to reflect =
miner behavior and fragments into incompatible local views, undermining its=
 role as a shared substrate. Instead of decentralizing control, filter modu=
les may simply externalize it: those who author =E2=80=9Cpopular=E2=80=9D (=
perhaps through demagoguery) filters gain outsized influence over what the =
rest see. The path to robustness is not more policy layers, but maintaining=
 a minimal, common relay system.<div><div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><d=
iv dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Thu, Sep 25, 2025 at 6:29=E2=80=AFPM=
 Greg Maxwell &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:gmaxwell@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank" r=
el=3D"noreferrer">gmaxwell@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote cl=
ass=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid=
 rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>&quot;There are l=
evels of survival we are prepared to accept.&quot;</div><div><br></div><div=
>Black and white thinking is not very helpful=C2=A0here particularly becaus=
e the goals of pro-filtering and anti-censorship aren&#39;t exact opposites=
.</div><div><br></div><div>A widely censored world would greatly degrade th=
e value of Bitcoin,=C2=A0particularly if the censors managed to enlist sign=
ificant miners.=C2=A0 It would be routed around at great cost, and with muc=
h less freedom provided for the world.=C2=A0 But just like people continue =
to buy racy magazines or other completely lawful targets of operation choke=
point=C2=A0with USD, people would still route around Bitcoin censorship.=C2=
=A0 =C2=A0But why even use Bitcoin if it&#39;s in a similar space of your t=
ransactions being capriciously blocks, your funds frozen, etc. as exists wi=
th legacy infrastructure?</div><div><br></div><div>But the irony is that th=
e traffic that people most desperately want to stop would be among the leas=
t impeded-- already today the spam traffic exists at all because it&#39;s w=
ell funded (or really existed a year ago, we are long past the huge spam fl=
oods-- they were depleted by costs and fizzled as predicted--=C2=A0and Ocea=
n Mining is fighting yesterday&#39;s battle. But what exists exists because=
 its well funded).=C2=A0 Meanwhile joe blow sending funds p2p to friends or=
 family in far off places doesn&#39;t have the funds or technical acumen=C2=
=A0to deal with censorship potentially targeting him, his activities, or hi=
s payees.=C2=A0 The effect of censorship is basically to require people to =
learn how to be money launderers to freely transact, and those who don&#39;=
t suffer.</div><div><br></div><div>The case is even stronger re: the recent=
ly filtering arguments because unlike some consensus rule anyone can just m=
ine a block (rent hashpower, you don&#39;t have to own it) or even more so =
the stuff like op_return limits have long been bypassed by major miners.=C2=
=A0 So the policy restriction was already not working.=C2=A0 =C2=A0So in so=
me sense there are arguments getting conflated:=C2=A0 The op_return policy =
limit has already failed.=C2=A0 So when people point out that it doesn&#39;=
t work it&#39;s just a statement of fact rather than speculation.=C2=A0 But=
 basically the &#39;bad&#39; traffic has a lot easier time than more innoce=
nt traffic, which is part of why filters can be both ineffective and danger=
ous.=C2=A0 It&#39;s also the case that existing filter efforts are not back=
ed by civil litigation or state mandates, but building infrastructure creat=
es an obvious stepping stone to that (in part because of the insufficient e=
ffectiveness of filtering)-- it&#39;s just a bad road that will almost inev=
itably lead to more escalations.=C2=A0 =C2=A0Bitcoin is just better of adop=
ting the position that other people&#39;s transactions aren&#39;t our busin=
ess, even if they&#39;re stupid or drive fees up a bit for some periods and=
 create annoyances, because the alternative is easily much worse.</div><div=
><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div=
><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div=
><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>=C2=A0=C2=A0</=
div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div><br><div class=3D"gm=
ail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Thu, Sep 25, 2025 at 9:=
26=E2=80=AFPM Aiden McClelland &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:me@drbonez.dev" target=
=3D"_blank" rel=3D"noreferrer">me@drbonez.dev</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><bloc=
kquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:=
1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"auto"><div>&gt;I h=
ave no idea what you&#39;re referring to there.</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br>=
</div><div dir=3D"auto">It&#39;s something I inferred from your primary arg=
ument that seems to be that user-configurable filters are bad because they =
would cause censorship. But it also sounds like you&#39;re saying such filt=
ers are completely ineffective at any sort of censorship at all. I don&#39;=
t really understand how these two viewpoints can coexist. What am I missing=
 here?</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">Best,</div><div><=
font face=3D"courier new, monospace"><b>Aiden McClelland</b></font></div></=
div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On=
 Thu, Sep 25, 2025, 3:14=E2=80=AFPM Greg Maxwell &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:gmax=
well@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank" rel=3D"noreferrer">gmaxwell@gmail.com</a>=
&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px =
0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div=
 dir=3D"ltr"><div>I am not a core developer. I have not been for some eight=
 years now.=C2=A0 =C2=A0</div><div><br></div><div>&gt;=C2=A0that you yourse=
lf are worried they will reach the 80% needed</div><div><br></div><div>I ha=
ve no idea what you&#39;re referring to there.=C2=A0 If lots of people run =
nodes that screw up propagation they&#39;ll be routed around.=C2=A0 I devel=
oped the technical concepts required to get nearly 100% tx coverage even if=
 almost all nodes are blocking them quite a few years ago ( <a href=3D"http=
s://arxiv.org/pdf/1905.10518" rel=3D"noreferrer noreferrer" target=3D"_blan=
k">https://arxiv.org/pdf/1905.10518</a> ), but deployment of the implementa=
tion has gone slow due to other factors (you know, such as the most experie=
nced=C2=A0developers being hit with billions of dollars in lawsuits as a co=
st for their support of Bitcoin)... I expect if censoring actually becomes =
widespread that technological improvements which further moot it will be de=
veloped.</div><div><br></div><div>These are just vulnerabilities that shoul=
d be closed anyways-- after all anyone at any time can just spin up any num=
ber of &quot;nodes&quot; that behave in arbitrary=C2=A0ways, at ant time.=
=C2=A0 It&#39;s been a lower priority because there are other countermeasur=
es (addnode-a-friend, manually setbanning=C2=A0bad peers, etc.) and aforeme=
ntione distractions.</div><div><br></div><div>&gt;=C2=A0censorship due to w=
idespread use of transaction filters is a bad thing (I&#39;m not really tak=
ing a stance on that right now).</div><div><br></div><div>I would point you=
 to the history of discussion on Bitcoin starting back with Satoshi&#39;s e=
arliest announcements, and perhaps to help you understand that if you want =
that what you want isn&#39;t bitcoin.=C2=A0 If after consideration you don&=
#39;t think censorship wouldn&#39;t be very bad, then really you and I have=
 nothing further to discuss.</div><div><br></div><div>&gt;=C2=A0are you wil=
ling to work with and compromise with people who are looking=20
for a solution like this? Or are you going to force them to abandon the=20
Core project entirely</div><div><br></div><div>I don&#39;t really think the=
re is any space to compromise with people who think it&#39;s okay to add ce=
nsorship to Bitcoin-- I mean sure whatever exact relay policy there is ther=
e is plenty of tradeoffs but from the start of this new filter debate the f=
ilter proponents have immediately come out with vile insults accusing devel=
opers of promoting child sexual abuse and shitcoins and what not----=C2=A0 =
that isn&#39;t some attempt to navigate a technical/political trademark, it=
&#39;s an effort to villify and destory the opposition.=C2=A0 =C2=A0And una=
mbiguously=C2=A0so as luke has said outright that his goal is to destroy Bi=
tcoin Core.=C2=A0 So what&#39;s the compromise there?=C2=A0=C2=A0</div><div=
><br></div><div>&gt;=C2=A0Or even worse still, felt compelled to coordinate=
 a UASF to block these transactions entirely?</div><div><br></div><div>I ve=
ry much think people should do that-- they should actually make some consen=
sus rules for their filters to fork off and we can see what the market thin=
ks.=C2=A0 -- And also even if the market prefers censored Bitcoin, that&#39=
;s also fine with me, in the sense in my view Bitcoin was created to be mon=
ey as largely free from human judgement as possible.=C2=A0 When it was crea=
ted most of the world was doing something else and didn&#39;t know they nee=
ded freedom money.=C2=A0 If it&#39;s still the case that most of the world =
doesn&#39;t want freedom money that would be no shock. They should be free =
to have what they want and people who want freedom money should be free to =
have what they want.=C2=A0 I got into bitcoin before it was worth practical=
ly anything because of the freedom it provides, and I think that&#39;s para=
mount.</div><div><br></div><div>Perhaps you should consider why they *don&#=
39;t* do that?=C2=A0 I&#39;d say it&#39;s because (1) it won&#39;t work, an=
d (2) it&#39;s not actually what the world wants-- an outspoken influence c=
ampaign is not necessarily all that reflective of much of anything.=C2=A0 P=
articularly given how inaccurate and emotionally pandering the filter advoc=
acy has been.=C2=A0 =C2=A0But, hey, I&#39;ve been wrong before.=C2=A0=C2=A0=
</div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><d=
iv dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Thu, Sep 25, 2025 at 8:51=E2=80=AFPM=
 Aiden McClelland &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:me@drbonez.dev" rel=3D"noreferrer n=
oreferrer" target=3D"_blank">me@drbonez.dev</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockq=
uote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1p=
x solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"auto"><div>Greg,=C2=
=A0</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">Let me assume for a =
minute, for the sake of argument, that I agree that transaction censorship =
due to widespread use of transaction filters is a bad thing (I&#39;m not re=
ally taking a stance on that right now). It is an irrefutable fact that a v=
ery large portion of the user base wants to filter transactions. So many so=
, that you yourself are worried they will reach the 80% needed to prevent c=
ertain types of transactions from propogating. Wouldn&#39;t it then be <i>w=
orse</i> if these 80% of users went and ran an alternative implementation, =
most likely written by it&#39;s most radical supporters? Or even worse stil=
l, felt compelled to coordinate a UASF to block these transactions entirely=
?</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">I at no point intended=
 to insinuate that you or any other core contributer be compelled to implem=
ent a proposal like this. It&#39;s up to its supporters to do so. The real =
question is, are you willing to work with and compromise with people who ar=
e looking for a solution like this? Or are you going to force them to aband=
on the Core project entirely?</div><div><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">Best,</=
div><div><font face=3D"courier new, monospace"><b>Aiden McClelland</b></fon=
t></div></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmai=
l_attr">On Thu, Sep 25, 2025, 2:03=E2=80=AFPM Greg Maxwell &lt;<a href=3D"m=
ailto:gmaxwell@gmail.com" rel=3D"noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target=
=3D"_blank">gmaxwell@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D=
"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(2=
04,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>&gt;=C2=A0<span lang=3D=
"EN-US">1)=C2=A0</span><span lang=3D"EN-US">Allowing node</span></div><div>=
<span lang=3D"EN-US"><br></span></div><div><span lang=3D"EN-US">Who said an=
ything about allowing?=C2=A0 Everyone is allowed to do whatever they want.=
=C2=A0 Drill a hole in your head if you like, not my concern.=C2=A0 None of=
 this thread is about what people are allowed to do-- that&#39;s off the ta=
ble.=C2=A0 The design and licensing of Bitcoin is such that no one gets to =
stop anyone else from what they=C2=A0want to do anyways (which is, in fact,=
 a big part of the issue here).=C2=A0 =C2=A0To think otherwise is to be stu=
ck in a kind of serf thinking where you can only do what other people allow=
 you to do.=C2=A0 That has never been what Bitcoin was about.</span></div><=
div><span lang=3D"EN-US"><br></span></div><div><span lang=3D"EN-US">Rather,=
 the question is should people who care about Bitcoin spend their time and =
money developing infrastructure that would be useful, even primarily useful=
, for censorship.=C2=A0 I say no.=C2=A0 Especially because any time spent o=
n it is time away from anti-censorship pro-privacy tools and because the ef=
fort spent doing so would undermine anti-censorship and pro-privacy efforts=
 because they would inevitably=C2=A0moot the efforts=C2=A0expected getting =
into peoples business and filtering their transactions.</span></div><div><s=
pan lang=3D"EN-US"><br></span></div><div><span lang=3D"EN-US">You don&#39;t=
 have to agree, and you&#39;re free to do your own thing just as I&#39;m fr=
ee to say that I think it&#39;s a bad=C2=A0direction.=C2=A0 From the very b=
eginning Bitcoin has stood against the freedom to transact being=C2=A0</spa=
n>overridden by some admin based on their judgment call weighing principles=
 against other concerns, or at the behest of their superiors.=C2=A0 So many=
 Bitcoiner will stand against, route around, and do what they can do to mak=
e ineffectual the blocking of consensual=C2=A0transactions.=C2=A0 It might =
not seem as many at the moment, but the pro-privacy and anti-censorship &#3=
9;side&#39; doesn&#39;t have a paid PR and influence campaign,=C2=A0 but it=
 also doesn&#39;t matter so much because Bitcoin takes advantage of the nat=
ure of information being easy to spread and hard to stifel and it doesn&#39=
;t that that huge an effort to route around censorship efforts.</div><div><=
br></div><div>There are elements of anti-censorship in Bitcoin that have be=
en so far underdeveloped.=C2=A0 It&#39;s unfortunate that their further dev=
elopment might be forced at a time when efforts are needed on other areas.=
=C2=A0 But perhaps they wouldn&#39;t get done without a concrete motivation=
. Such is life.</div><div><br></div><div><span lang=3D"EN-US"><br></span></=
div><div><span lang=3D"EN-US"><br></span></div><div><span lang=3D"EN-US"><b=
r></span></div></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=
=3D"gmail_attr">On Thu, Sep 25, 2025 at 9:21=E2=80=AFAM yes_please &lt;<a h=
ref=3D"mailto:caucasianjazz12@gmail.com" rel=3D"noreferrer noreferrer noref=
errer noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">caucasianjazz12@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote=
:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.=
8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"lt=
r"><p style=3D"color:rgba(232,230,227,0.87);font-family:Roboto,RobotoDraft,=
Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif;font-size:14px"><span lang=3D"EN-US">Sorry Greg,=
 could you please elaborate further on your ideas? Some are not exactly cle=
ar:</span></p><p style=3D"color:rgba(232,230,227,0.87);font-family:Roboto,R=
obotoDraft,Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif;font-size:14px"><span lang=3D"EN-US">=
1)=C2=A0</span><span lang=3D"EN-US">Allowing node runners to configure thei=
r node as they please and refuse to relay some txs is considered authoritar=
ian, censorship, and an attempt to regulate third parties conduct. On the o=
ther hand, forcing nodes to merge towards a single shared configuration (by=
 preventing them to block txs) is not considered authoritarian because this=
 imposition does not discriminate towards any txs and is thus non-authorita=
rian? Did I get the reasoning correctly here?</span></p><p style=3D"color:r=
gba(232,230,227,0.87);font-family:Roboto,RobotoDraft,Helvetica,Arial,sans-s=
erif;font-size:14px"><span lang=3D"EN-US">2) I</span><span>f the aim is to =
have a homogenous mempool state and to model what will get mined, shouldn=
=E2=80=99t we reach this state through distributed independent nodes who de=
cide=C2=A0independently on what they prefer this homogenous state to be? If=
 we don=E2=80=99t reach this state through this distributed/independent mec=
hanism, then how are we to reach this state? Who gets to decide and steer t=
he direction so that we all converge towards this homogenous state?=C2=A0 O=
ne of the strongest aspects of bitcoin is the fact that no single party can=
 force a change/direction, and the network has to somehow reach a shared ag=
reement through independent decision makers who act in what manner they thi=
nk is best. The proposed BIP seems to be aligned with such a principle, I f=
ail to see any authoritarian aspect here.=C2=A0</span></p><p style=3D"color=
:rgba(232,230,227,0.87);font-family:Roboto,RobotoDraft,Helvetica,Arial,sans=
-serif;font-size:14px"><span>3)=C2=A0</span><span>I share your sentiment an=
d the aim to have a homogenous mempool state, but I am skeptical of the man=
ner in which we are to achieve this according to the ideas you have here ex=
pressed (namely not through a distributed independent organic manner)</span=
></p><p style=3D"color:rgba(232,230,227,0.87);font-family:Roboto,RobotoDraf=
t,Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif;font-size:14px"><span lang=3D"EN-US"><br></spa=
n></p><p style=3D"color:rgba(232,230,227,0.87);font-family:Roboto,RobotoDra=
ft,Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif;font-size:14px"><span lang=3D"EN-US">Respectf=
ully, yes_please=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0</span></p></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_=
quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Thu, Sep 25, 2025 at 12:50=
=E2=80=AFAM Greg Maxwell &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:gmaxwell@gmail.com" rel=3D"n=
oreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">gmaxwell@gmai=
l.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"ma=
rgin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:=
1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>So that when the &quot;consistent state&quot; ch=
anges as a result of some issue you can update configs instead of having to=
 update software-- which has considerable more costs and risks, especially =
if you&#39;re carrying local customizations as many miners do.</div><div><b=
r></div></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmai=
l_attr">On Wed, Sep 24, 2025 at 8:47=E2=80=AFPM Aiden McClelland &lt;<a hre=
f=3D"mailto:me@drbonez.dev" rel=3D"noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer norefer=
rer" target=3D"_blank">me@drbonez.dev</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote c=
lass=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px soli=
d rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">If mempool consistency across the netw=
ork is all that is important, why allow any configuration of mempool relay =
policies at all?<br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"auto" class=
=3D"gmail_attr">On Wednesday, September 24, 2025 at 12:47:28=E2=80=AFPM UTC=
-6 Greg Maxwell wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"=
margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-lef=
t:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>This appears to substantially=C2=A0misundersta=
nds the purpose of the mempool broadly in the network-- it&#39;s purpose is=
 to model what will get mined.=C2=A0 If you&#39;re not doing that you might=
 as well set blocks only.=C2=A0 Significant=C2=A0discrepancies=C2=A0are har=
mful to the system and promote centralization=C2=A0and fail to achieve a us=
eful purpose in any case.=C2=A0 What marginal benefits might be provided do=
 not justify=C2=A0building and deploying the technological=C2=A0infrastruct=
ure=C2=A0for massive censorship.</div><div><br></div><div>If you think this=
 is important, I advise you to select another cryptocurrency which is compa=
tible with such authoritarian=C2=A0leanings.=C2=A0 -- though I am unsure if=
 any exist since it is such a transparently pointless direction.</div><div>=
<br></div></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"></div><div class=3D"gmail_qu=
ote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Wed, Sep 24, 2025 at 6:30=E2=
=80=AFPM Aiden McClelland &lt;<a rel=3D"nofollow noreferrer noreferrer nore=
ferrer noreferrer">m...@drbonez.dev</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div></div><div clas=
s=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px=
 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div>Hi=
 all,</div><div><br></div><div>I&#39;d like to share for discussion a draft=
 BIP to allow for a modular mempool/relay policy: <a href=3D"https://github=
.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/1985" rel=3D"nofollow noreferrer noreferrer noreferr=
er noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/1985<=
/a><br><br></div><div>I think it could potentially reduce conflict within t=
he community around relay policy, as an alternative to running lots of diff=
erent node implementations/forks when there are disagreements.</div><div><b=
r></div><div>I am working on a reference implementation using Bellard&#39;s=
 QuickJS, but it has been almost a decade since I&#39;ve written C++, so it=
&#39;s slow going and I&#39;m sure doesn&#39;t follow best-practices. Once =
it&#39;s working, it can be cleaned up.</div><div><br></div><div>Thanks,</d=
iv><div>Aiden McClelland<br></div>

<p></p></blockquote></div><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquote class=3D"g=
mail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204=
,204,204);padding-left:1ex">

-- <br>
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;Bitcoin Development Mailing List&quot; group.<br>
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to <a rel=3D"nofollow noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer">bit=
coindev+...@googlegroups.com</a>.<br>
To view this discussion visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/=
bitcoindev/cbdab6fa-93bc-44c9-80f0-6c68c6554f56n%40googlegroups.com?utm_med=
ium=3Demail&amp;utm_source=3Dfooter" rel=3D"nofollow noreferrer noreferrer =
noreferrer noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/=
bitcoindev/cbdab6fa-93bc-44c9-80f0-6c68c6554f56n%40googlegroups.com</a>.<br=
>
</blockquote></div>
</blockquote></div>

<p></p>

-- <br>
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;Bitcoin Development Mailing List&quot; group.<br>
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to <a href=3D"mailto:bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com" rel=3D"n=
oreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">bitcoindev+un=
subscribe@googlegroups.com</a>.<br>
To view this discussion visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/=
bitcoindev/de4dae19-86f4-4d7a-a895-b48664babbfcn%40googlegroups.com?utm_med=
ium=3Demail&amp;utm_source=3Dfooter" rel=3D"noreferrer noreferrer noreferre=
r noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoinde=
v/de4dae19-86f4-4d7a-a895-b48664babbfcn%40googlegroups.com</a>.<br>
</blockquote></div>

<p></p>

-- <br>
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;Bitcoin Development Mailing List&quot; group.<br>
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to <a href=3D"mailto:bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com" rel=3D"n=
oreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">bitcoindev+un=
subscribe@googlegroups.com</a>.<br>
To view this discussion visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/=
bitcoindev/CAAS2fgRABqRe1j6xzW0uhVrDiQnL6x1X6ALzfsJ7w4GztWVeNA%40mail.gmail=
.com?utm_medium=3Demail&amp;utm_source=3Dfooter" rel=3D"noreferrer noreferr=
er noreferrer noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://groups.google.com/d/msg=
id/bitcoindev/CAAS2fgRABqRe1j6xzW0uhVrDiQnL6x1X6ALzfsJ7w4GztWVeNA%40mail.gm=
ail.com</a>.<br>
</blockquote></div>
</blockquote></div>
</blockquote></div>
</blockquote></div>
</blockquote></div>
</blockquote></div>

<p></p>

-- <br>
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;Bitcoin Development Mailing List&quot; group.<br>
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to <a href=3D"mailto:bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com" target=
=3D"_blank" rel=3D"noreferrer">bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com</a>.=
<br>
To view this discussion visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/=
bitcoindev/CAAS2fgSXX5_TU86r%3DQOQAvg84tpRa7o9ha5%3DEn3tPmTUBrrqhw%40mail.g=
mail.com?utm_medium=3Demail&amp;utm_source=3Dfooter" target=3D"_blank" rel=
=3D"noreferrer">https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/CAAS2fgSXX5_TU=
86r%3DQOQAvg84tpRa7o9ha5%3DEn3tPmTUBrrqhw%40mail.gmail.com</a>.<br>
</blockquote></div></div></div></div>
</blockquote></div>

<p></p>

-- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;Bitcoin Development Mailing List&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to <a href=3D"mailto:bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com">bitcoind=
ev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com</a>.<br />
To view this discussion visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/=
bitcoindev/CAOSz24SZ9x_c%3D3eXY0McxQbivbG5zHOfTiaZjR%2B%3DuAju4%2BpC3Q%40ma=
il.gmail.com?utm_medium=3Demail&utm_source=3Dfooter">https://groups.google.=
com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/CAOSz24SZ9x_c%3D3eXY0McxQbivbG5zHOfTiaZjR%2B%3DuAju4=
%2BpC3Q%40mail.gmail.com</a>.<br />

--00000000000013c04e063faae3d2--