The miners have to adapt to the node runners' rules, not the other way around.

They are the ones risking it all to relay SPAM. And if the whole network is against that, they will be the ones losing big, as they should.

This is Jason Hughes' response to Nifty and the whole Core camp's weak, weak arguments -- ---> https://x.com/wk057/status/1968324685952692369

A quote:

"Instead, the P2P network of node runners should set sane policies, and miners who act against the collective will of the decentralized P2P network SHOULD be penalized for mining blocks that don't fit with the majority of nodes in the form of slower block propagation and higher stale rates.

If you're a sane miner, you go with the overall will of the network itself (node runners) and get some benefit from the associated speedup. If you go against what the majority of the network is willing to relay and still want to spam the network, then you get penalized in the form of losing blocks to slow propagation."

This is what's going to happen when the OP_RETURN limits are lifted:

Spammers and scammers will use and abuse the unlimited OP_RETURN space, AND they will keep using all their more harmful techniques.

Why wouldn't they? Core's changes basically legitimize their SPAM, giving them carte blanche to keep abusing the Bitcoin network.

This will be orders of magnitude more harmful to decentralization than what Nifty described. The damage already done is orders of magnitude more harmful, just look at this -- ---> https://wtfhappenedinfeb2023.com/stats-about-spam

Anyway, Bitcoin is money. Spam is spam.