pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 3 replies \ @supertestnet 19 Dec 2023 \ parent \ on: Inviscriptions - How to bypass Luke's filtering and mint useless NFTs anyway bitcoin
It seems to me there is a second reason, beyond spite: to disincentive inscriptions. If, due to translation censorship, you lost money irrecoverably whenever you did an invisible inscription, perhaps inscribers would stop doing it
Money spent on fees would never be truly lost, as long as the inscriber still knows their translator secret, and as long as they have some hope of being able to publish it on-chain in the future. Again, I covered all of this in the article.
Furthermore, even if one translator transaction can be identified and effectively excluded from the blockchain, the ciphertext is already on-chain, so censoring nodes would need to ensure that no other translator transactions for that inviscription ever make it onto the chain in perpetuity, which is no small feat.And even then, the inscribing user can still publish theirtranslatoroff-chain to reveal the inscription data, and prove they inscribed bitcoins with said data. It just won't be detectable by on-chain scanning alone.
reply
The latter option -- "do it off chain" -- is rather encouraging
Maybe you could do inscriptions even more invisibly by doing more parts of the process off chain
reply
You can do the whole process off-chain using OpenTimestamps and taproot commitments if you wanted to.
The people using inscriptions don't care about efficiency though :( They want it all on-chain, for reasons beyond my understanding.