As someone who has disagreed with you in the past, I have added new information since then and I now agree with you. The common desire is a unanimous 'truth' that doesn't require questioning our own biases. Thank you for being an outlet for me to search for that missing info!

All fair points. You've given me a bit to think about...no pun intended

Likewise, I appreciate we could discuss this in a civil manner (quite rare these days) I find appealing to the text in the white paper, in today's context vs. when it was written, requires also acknowledging that the code pushed on Jan 3 2009 is not the same as it is today. Hell, even the 21M supply cap wasn't coded in the original software release (see https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0042.mediawiki ), nor was the supply cap even mentioned in the white paper. Op_return wasn't added until 2014 (same version release [Bitcoin Core version 0.9.0] that the above BIP was added to consensus). So to appeal to the white paper as the absolute intent of the project would be a little faulty in my opinion

From what I've looked into it, running knots doesn't protect you from other's using the network for their own agenda (I'm not co-signing anyone else's agenda, as I only control what I can control). You can run knots, but know that the node software will still carry (cache) at least 100 non standard transactions in order to help with block reconstruction. I get the fact that no one wants to be associated with things they believe are abhorrent (I don't either), but it simply is not true that these things would be plain text and human readable/discernible without willingly running the bytes through a translator (decryption). *Also, this type of info is being XOR'd (obfuscated) through randomized XOR-key (making it more difficult to simply unscramble, kinda like the idea of a nonce [number once]) *This is assuming you are running Core 28 or newer with initial block download. If running a prior version, there is an XOR tool that does not require you to re-download the entire block history again. The main goal should be to have honest users making transactions using bitcoin's network to drown out any perceived illicit materials making it's way into blocks (gate-kept by block size and fees), not appeal to authority based on subjective (albeit consensus) morality I'd push back on point 1. You want bitcoin to be a monetary network (and by your measure it very well might be). This won't be absolutely true until it is unanimously used as such by all humans on this planet. Until then, the absolute truth is that bitcoin is a messaging system (based on concise design of the code being run) I agree with point 2. The only problem here is that what is considered 'illicit' or undesirable changes throughout history. This creates a constant power struggle over the narrative of what is subjectively undesirable to the largest cohort of humans As to point 3., my original post was being facetious, being we are using that platform right now. I'm trying to draw the parallels between both networks. Nostr, at is foundation, is a messaging network (just as bitcoin is). The problem of content (or transaction) curation leads to the issue mentioned above about point 2. I appreciate your response and respect it. These are ultimately my thoughts and it is not meant to be imposed on you. Please run Knots or whatever software you choose. Ultimately I find we can all be stronger together and will find the way through discourse. Cheers!

I apologize, I must take a step back myself 😅 I got lost in a thread of your studybitcoin posts that were quote-posting prior study material. So that led me to make one comment generally on the AI text (not specific to the post wrt to analyzing P's original post). For clarity, this method of learning is great, but some of the info is missing context or full information. I understand getting the general gist is normally sufficient, but with bitcoin there are so many nuances that are normally missed (evidenced by Grok, for example, having convos with tenured & technical individuals on X needing to be corrected on certain aspects it responded confidently on) src: https://x.com/evoskuil/status/1962793264433566006 Feel free to ignore me, as I'm a complete stranger to you. But I appreciate the discourse!

Yeah, however...P's post is an opinion, it's not objective truth. LLMs are always a product of what they are trained on, so it is possible to absorb biases and present them as absolute truth. I'm not intending to impede you doing your own research, and I actually applaud you for actually doing it! I simply want to bring up the fact that some of the information I read in the text was either hallucinated or based on incorrect assumptions

This AI is insanely biased and is only basing its analysis on conversations on X/Twitter. It doesn't take into account the bitcoindev mailing list, delving bitcoin or the bitcoin core meeting logs. I'd caution ingesting this info as absolute truth with regards to the history of OP-Return

when "Nostr is a CSAM Relay Service" video?

And don't forget to hit local pastures to pick up some shirttail creek farms goods (eggs are so good)

It's not line dancing, but broken spoke has texas two step dance lessons on Friday nights