Bitcoin Soft Fork Proposal Sparks Debate Over Censorship and Legal Threats
A new Bitcoin soft fork improvement proposal, created by core developer Luke Dashjr, has ignited a heated debate within the Bitcoin community. The proposal, released on Friday, aims to restrict data in Bitcoin (BTC) transactions through a year-long soft fork, while developing a more permanent solution to address concerns that bad actors can embed illegal and immoral content on the blockchain following the Bitcoin Core v30 update.
The proposal has sparked controversy, with some critics arguing that it contradicts Bitcoin’s core principle of permissionless use. The proposal’s language, which states that “any attempt to reject this soft fork faces a moral and legal obstacle,” has been interpreted by some as a legal threat. 
Critics Argue Proposal is an Attack on Bitcoin
Bitcoin, the first cryptocurrency, was designed to disrupt traditional financial institutions and empower individuals. Critics of the proposal believe that any form of censorship or limitation on data size contradicts Bitcoin’s core principle of permissionless use. Ben Kaufman, a programmer and software developer, said a “fork under threat of legal consequences is the clearest case of an attack on Bitcoin.” Canadian cryptographer and computer scientist Peter Todd also chimed in, saying it was “clear that he expects his soft fork to be adopted due to legal threats.” 
Galaxy Digital’s Alex Thorn commented on Todd’s post, agreeing that it was “explicitly an attack on Bitcoin, but also incredibly stupid.” Some also warned that the network could face a chain split if miners and users parted ways upon activation.
Others Believe Proposal was Misinterpreted
Users have long been able to embed messages on the chain. The recent Bitcoin Core v30 update enables much larger data payloads, which the proposal says has opened the door to anyone participating in the network being held criminally liable if the content posted in the transactions is illegal. Some users believe that the proposal’s language was misinterpreted, and that it was not intended to be a legal threat. Luke Dashjr appeared to support this argument, saying: “It doesn’t say that. Maybe you can suggest a clarification if you think it’s unclear.” 
Soft Fork May be Irrelevant Anyway
According to Dashjr, the soft fork proposal is already underway and there are no technical objections. However, Peter Todd may have already found a way to exploit the fix included in the proposal. He claims to have recorded a transaction that contained the entire text of the proposed fork, which is “100% standard and fully compatible” with the improvement proposal. 
Meanwhile, BitMEX Research explained that a malicious actor seeking to conduct a double-spend attack could introduce illegal content onto the chain to “trigger a reorganization and succeed in their attack,” thereby creating an “economic incentive” to place illegal content on the chain. For more information, visit https://cointelegraph.com/news/bitcoin-soft-fork-luke-dashjr-legal-threat-debate?utm_source=rss_feed&utm_medium=rss_tag_blockchain&utm_campaign=rss_partner_inbound
