11–20 of 83 posts
[1]: https://bitcoinsv.io
So from the last time this came up: https://thebitcoinnews.com/no-there-isnt-child-porn-on-the-b...
With the important bit here:
80 bytes is all that OP_RETURN can store, and what’s more that information is subject to deletion. That’s because bitcoin nodes are capable of pruning “provably unspendable” UTXOs for efficiency, which include OP_RETURN data.
TL;DR the last time the schadenfreudists were looking for something to point and laugh at on this front, they didn't understand the technicalities of what they were talking about _at all_.
This BBC article makes an interesting claim:
"In January, the amount of data that could be added to the BSV block chain was increased significantly.
Before that, people could generally add only short chunks of text or web links to the block chain.
But now it is possible to add full images in an encoded format."
I've never heard of this BSV coin before, so I don't know the details of this change. Assuming it's a fork of bitcoin and all they did was increase the allowable size of the OP_RETURN, this will once again be sensationalist reporting with no substance. I'd imagine the first thing BSV nodes would do is prune the OP_RETURN garbage because who wants to be paying the storage cost of other peoples embedded images?
But hey, the BBC article is extremely light on details. Maybe this is something that can't be pruned so easily? Does anyone know?
> He said there was "ongoing research" to find ways to remove such content from block chains but these were "not yet mature". Either you have centralization, which nobody wants, or you have a bot that everyone agrees on to censor things, and people will will always find ways around bots. Are there really any other alternatives?
The basic idea is you have a way to delete the data associated with an old transaction but not the transaction itself. A majority have to agree to the redaction though and the fact something has been redacted is recorded.
So, the easiest for the government to destroy blockchain is to supplant their own illegal images onto the blockchain themselves...
https://www.wired.com/story/why-porn-on-the-blockchain-wont-...
So, the easiest for the government to destroy blockchain is to supplant their own illegal images onto the blockchain themselves...
So, the easiest for the government to destroy blockchain is to supplant their own illegal images onto the blockchain themselves...
What if someone added data in a form that only later after a viewer appeared will it reveal this type of content. This would make any system with that data immediately illegal.
Looking down the road what it was encoded in dna would it be illegal for someone to read another person's dna?
If someone had a tattoo on there face of one of these images would security cameras need to wipe any data caught?
BSV is, apparently, yet another bitcoin fork — it’s a 4 month old Chinese bitcoin fork with 1 released version and a very vague website[1]. BBC does not explain at all how this differs from Bitcoin or the relevance of this coin. [1]: https://bitcoinsv.io