<oembed><type>rich</type><version>1.0</version><title>BitcoinLizard wrote</title><author_name>BitcoinLizard (npub1k6…ftryn)</author_name><author_url>https://nostr.now/npub1k6f0ecam577lay8mm8azfvs3u4xvl23q82zpc3htee6ath09gg0s9ftryn</author_url><provider_name>njump</provider_name><provider_url>https://nostr.now</provider_url><html>I absolutely agree with you and I think most people that are against BIP-110 do as well. In spirit, it would be ideal if there were no monkey jpegs on #Bitcoin.&#xA;&#xA;One of the areas where the BIP-110 argument fails for me is that it assumes that everything will work correctly and there will be no unintended consequences of their soft fork despite a tiny developer team. Making changes to Bitcoin is always a risk. To me, the risk/reward calculation is not there to justify this change. It has been demonstrated several times that spammers will run out of money. Today (and for months prior) I can send transactions for next to nothing.&#xA;&#xA;I also think this change succeeding would set a terrible precidend that would be exploited by governments. Two crazy guys and a loud minority of social media keyboard warriors shouldn&#39;t be able to change Bitcoin. If they can, I will probably exit Bitcoin entirely as that would demonstrate to me that Bitcoin could easily be destroyed by a motivated attacker.</html></oembed>