Topic: Someone inscribed the War Logs of Wikileaks into BTC (Read 337 times)

My views are rather because they care for Assange, they reshare and resound these things again which is indirectly intended to support rejecting Assange's detention and, especially in this case, the extradition request. Not specifically waging a dead war.


Still, I do not see the government would be willing to initiate this project. Not to mention this is limited (max 76,911 inscription), so random jpegs would last longer if their goals were to clog the networks.


I show that reference specifically to support the authenticity of the leaks.

Regarding the project's inscribed information itself, see:


The are 76,911 available data to be inscribed. Users can publish a maximum of 300 logs per transaction.

You can play around on the site, to see the calculation of how much block spaces it consumes per log.
https://projectspartacus.org/Publish

Really exciting news, basically there was a lot of talk and objection to Ordinals and the problems it might cause to the Bitcoin network due to congestion and so on.

Now we come to a new type of problem. Documenting WikiLeaks documents on the Bitcoin blockchain will be an annoying matter for the US government, which already hates Bitcoin. Now this hatred will increase and the United States has an additional reason to attack Bitcoin.

Of course, everyone is free to use Bitcoin and Blockchain in the way that suits them, but I do not know where this will lead us. I do not know whether the results will be positive or negative in the long term.

How much data or images can they upload, I mean the block space is limited and uploading thousands of records would be very expensive.
Such news will be exploited in future legislation, but this is not new. For many years, notices of links to illegal things have been posted on the Bitcoin blockchain, and if it were not for newspaper articles, no one except the miners would have known about them.
If newspapers and articles stop promoting this news, most likely no one will know about it.

They really are inscribing those logs on the BTC blockchain and you are right, people really are getting creative with these ordinals, and as I said in the post BTC did not provide us financial freedom but freedom of speech too. But what I am afraid of is, this technology might be used for bad purposes. For like, last time someone uploaded a video of terrorists attacking people in Mosques on FB and later deleted it. Well, if they upload such sensitive data on the BTC blockchain or upload the CP or Rap videos on the BTC blockchain.

Or anything against authorities take strict actions, If uploaded on the BTC blockchain then there is no way for authorities to track them, and what if those inscribers would use the mixer technology to inscribe such content on the BTC blockchain to obfuscate their transactions to avoid from getting caught.

I hope this will not come true and BTC will be used for what it is made.

quoting for posterity. doomad yet again pretending one thing but saying another. doomad hates anyone "taking it up" with the devs.. doomad doesnt want anyone telling devs things.(unless its a sponsoring corporation)

doomad wants more bloat but less transactional data. doomad hates bitcoin being a payment system. doomad loves the idea of junk data being on the blockchain

Discussions are always happening in the development scene, for example once some devs were discussing the possibility of reducing the block size to smaller sizes while some others about hard fork to increase it.

That part seems to be news to devs.  Last I checked some of them were discussing removing the limits on OP_RETURN.  Either way, it's something you'll have to have to take up with them.

---

//EDIT:  I see fascist1 is taking more pot-shots that clearly don't warrant a new post to respond to:


Engaging in a reasonable discussion with developers is perfectly acceptable.  But you have proven time and again that you are incapable of reasonable behaviour.  You demand shit like a petulant, spoiled child.  You treat developers as though they were your own personal slaves.  Get REKT plz.

Saying bitcoin's utility is as a payment system and NOT a cloud storage is neither my definition nor is it an arbitrary one. It is the definition of Bitcoin that has always been accepted by all bitcoiners and it is the definition the inventor of Bitcoin has used to define it and it is also the definition used in the Bitcoin whitepaper.

Not to mention that "using bitcoin blockchain as a cloud storage" has been the attack that we have always strived to prevent. From the day OP_RETURN was introduced and using outputs to inject arbitrary size data was "softly" banned by standard rules and then the limits placed on OP_RETURN.

I think this is a way for them to usher in a new age of information gathering, wikileaks as it is have been taken down multiple times only to resurface again, so losing it for one last time forever is definitely a massive possibility. Inscribing information into the blockchain to make it immutable, permanent and unalterable is one good move to make sure no organization can take it down even if they wanted to. So while some may think that this is an attack against bitcoin, I see this as a way for them to introduce bitcoin to a new age of information, and possibly even push for Web3.0

Anywho, I might just be spitfalling here but I definitely see this as a bold move for the people in Wikileaks.

In truth, there has been more and more discoveries and development in recent times. It’s only a matter of time for certain innovations yo be associated with several other use cases. With the ordinals loophole, it becomes a very good revenue to ensure proper data collection and safety over the years. Though this was done on the Bitcoin Blockchain, this is only a utilization of the opportunities available on the blockchain network and nothing more.

If this could lead to attacks on the Bitcoin Blockchain network in order to override what’s been done, I think that is possible but, I doubt there would be any success on it as I like to believe it’s been attempted already in other to discredit the system.

The world is changing and the people who live in it has to know well enough on how to handle the changes of the time we exist.

It's like asking are rocks used for good or evil. They can be tools or weapons, and they are going to be used in every way humans can think of. Same goes with bitcoin.
I don't have an opinion if this specific thing was good or bad. That doesn't really matter to me, it just proves that every people will use it any way they see fit and no one really can stop them. If someone thought this was bad there will be worst and better use cases. I guarantee you that.

Bitcoin is a P2P protocol. It's a tool and it's always going to be used for good and evil purposes and purposes beyond them. Just like every tool out there.

You'd only delay the inevitable.  People would just get creative and just start obfuscating the data so no one would notice.  Or get around it by encrypting the sensitive data they sent to the next block, so no one could tell what it is.  And then publishing a key to decode it in a subsequent block.  It's just more cat'n'mouse / whack-a-mole / etc.

Plus, you're still reliant on asking miners to reject stuff simply because you don't like it.  Perhaps they might not want to do that.  Have you tried asking their opinion?

Bitcoin is meant for everyone the same way blockchain works perfectly for the security and privacy of those who think using that is of high benefit to them, we are less concerned about the content on these inscribed NFTs than the effective utilization that this has brought about the wider use case of the bitcoin block space for ordinals, as far as am concerned, there's nothing to prove that these inscriptions are war logs, or wikileaks sensitive contents, but if so it was, then i think bitcoin and blockchain are both getting more exposure by the people to unravel more opportunities in them and their uses.

In my opinion, in this case, BTC is being used in the wrong way. I wouldn't say it for a bad purpose, but it is being used in the wrong way. It was not meant to be some Google Drive or any cloud storage that provided decentralization features and other things. It is only meant to be used in finance to digitalize the financial world and free it from centralized authorities. But the uploading of data, like pictures and videos, poses some next-level threats to the BTC blockchain. What if someone uploaded the leaks of someone on the BTC blockchain, like a big celebrity or a video of some top-level person who has big connections?

The bad thing will be that this will not be altered or deleted after. I think to deal with this, we need an upgrade that would filter out the sensitive data and allow the validators to reject those entries.

I would not say it's diverted from the current war, it's just a thought of you. But I do agree that BTC has provided us with freedom of speech too. Like in our country, many political leaders are doing what they should not do, and all social media and new agencies are with them, and if anyone raises questions, we don't know where they go. The point is, that blockchain does provide us with freedom of speech now, and I like it, but it will also compromise the blockchain, and the fee will be high.

Can't say I'm surprised that you're once again taking the opportunity to cry your pathetic eyes out about it.  Cry more plz.  

a)  You're an illiterate moron and you seemingly have no idea what I want, despite all the times I've made it abundantly clear to you over the years.

b)  What I want is not relevant to the discussion at hand.  What matters in this topic is what miners and a majority of non-mining full-node users are prepared to accept and relay.

Now, do you have any useful contributions to make to this topic, or is crying about 2016 the entirety of your capability?  One day you'll surprise us and have some topical, relevant views to express.

yet again you keep forgetting that bitcoin has not always had a rule to allow upto 4mb of junk per tx.. new features were added to soften the rules and allow things to be added unchecked.. which these new features are the flaw that carries different connotations

its funny that a guy that didnt want features that allow more transactions due to his fear of bloat. is now allowing non transaction dta to be added which causes bloat which he does not want to stop

you keep saying about freedoms yet you keep shouting that people should have no choice or method to request features be added/disabled outside the centralised group of devs in command of changes.. and yes you adore the tyranny of central core control, you dont want the mass population having a say against core, you like the bypass that allows core to change their preferences without mass consent

The beautiful way of praising decentralization by telling others what to do because one knows better, right?

However this topic is pretty interesting, I see cheering for documenting the war crimes committed by the US, let's see if someone starts inscribing in the blockchain the crimes committed by Russia in Ukraine will we have the same thing? Or the pictures of dead Israelis in the Hamas attack? If blockchain is supposed to offer refuge from people trying to erase stuff from the internet then how about we inscribe all of Mia Kalifa movies since she was banned from her show due to her support for Palestine? Would be a nice gesture!

What would be the best way and attitude towards these things?

Probably not doing anything and not taking stupid sides in any of them, if somebody wants to burn money on something 'HIS COINS, HIS DECISION", you don't like the way how Bitcoin currently operates, it's open source, you go and make your own bitcoin, with booze and hookers!  

If somebody would want to attack Bitcoin by spamming the mempool he could have done so ordinals or not ordinals, if Bitcoin were to be defeated by someone willing to spend 1 million a day on fee spam then what chances would it have against a government willing to spend billions?  


Over exaggerating, nobody cares anymore about those war logs, everyone who cared knows about them a long time ago, if you go on the street and ask the average Joe when the invasion of Afghanistan started I doubt you will get 10% with the right year.

People have been putting arbitrary data in Bitcoin transactions for over a decade, including Satoshi.


Continuing to mischaracterize it as an "attack" serves no purpose except to add emotional weight to a feeble argument. Wise minds are capable of assessing the longevity of trends, and the data suggests the trend is coming to an end. I assume that the core maintainers do not want to hastily interject changes to a delicate system if they are ultimately unnecessary.

If Ordinals was an "attack", it was an utter failure and only served to demonstrate bitcoin's robustness.

I think these people are making enemies for the Bitcoin community and the governments that are being targetted with these war logs getting printed on the Blockchain won't be happy.
They will surely try to stop this from happening which will result in strict regulatory actions against Bitcoin and it always hinders the normal people who wanted to invest and be part of this community.

If someone is acting within the rules and you try to change the rules, then "fixing it" suddenly carries very different connotations.  You are working from the perspective that your definition of valid use is correct and that theirs is incorrect, but I don't see anywhere that this has been established and agreed to by a significant portion of users.

Beyond that, attempting to resist this type of usage means making both yourself, along with any developers that joined in with the change, self-declared arbiters of what is or isn't an "acceptable" transaction and then taking away the freedoms of others to make those types of transactions.  That was always going to be fighting a losing battle when you've got little to back it up.

Path of least resistance wins again.