‘Bitcoin Standard’ Author Saifedean Ammous Backs Funding Developer to Fight Bitcoin Spam Inscriptions
Saifedean Ammous, economist and author of the influential book The Bitcoin Standard, has entered the ongoing debate over spam inscriptions clogging the Bitcoin network, expressing his willingness to financially support a dedicated developer focused on making Bitcoin spamming more difficult and costly. Ammous’s remarks come amid increasing community concerns about the proliferation of non-monetary data-especially JPEG images-embedded in Bitcoin transactions through the Ordinals protocol.
The Spam Inscription Controversy: What’s at Stake?
The Bitcoin network, originally designed as a peer-to-peer monetary system, has recently seen a surge in so-called “inscriptions” or Ordinals-small pieces of data, often images or text, embedded directly into Bitcoin transactions. While this innovation has opened new creative and collectible possibilities, many in the community argue that it threatens Bitcoin’s fundamental purpose by bloating the blockchain and increasing node operator costs.
Pseudonymous developer GrassFedBitcoin recently called for Bitcoin Core to merge pull request #28408, a technical proposal aimed at enabling node operators to filter out unwanted inscriptions more easily. According to GrassFedBitcoin, the current lack of effective filtering tools leads to unnecessary blockchain bloat and undermines Bitcoin’s integrity as a monetary protocol.
“No one running a node wants to relay inscriptions,” GrassFedBitcoin wrote. He argued that past increases to the OP_RETURN data limits were based on false assumptions and pushed for a configurable, default policy discouraging the use of Bitcoin for storing non-monetary data like JPEGs.
Saifedean Ammous’s Support and Perspective
Responding to GrassFedBitcoin’s thread, Ammous expressed strong support for efforts to combat spam inscriptions and pledged to “throw in a few sats” to fund a full-time developer dedicated to this cause. Ammous framed the fight against Bitcoin spam as an ongoing arms race, comparing it to the persistent battle against email spam.
“It’s not easy, but it’s worth trying to help bankrupt the spammers faster,” Ammous said, emphasizing that fighting spam is not censorship. He pointed out that node operators already reject invalid transactions, so filtering out spam is a valid and necessary extension of network maintenance.
Ammous added, “So a node runner looking to remove retards’ spam is no less valid than retards’ spam,” highlighting the legitimacy of defensive measures against spammy data.
The Technical Debate: Challenges and Counterarguments
While Ammous and GrassFedBitcoin advocate for inscription filtering, Blockstream CEO Adam Back cautioned against the idea, describing it as an “arms race.” Back noted that spam data embedded in Bitcoin transactions can be endlessly modified using complex code structures, requiring constant updates to filtering tools.
This dynamic means that any attempt to filter inscriptions could lead to an ongoing cycle of countermeasures and evasions, potentially complicating node operation and consensus.
Another community member suggested that Core developers treat spam-coding employees at certain startups as “unwilling QA engineers,” implying that spam creators unintentionally help improve Bitcoin’s resilience by exposing vulnerabilities.
Nevertheless, Ammous proposed going further by “deprecating” the work of developers building spam tools and even hiring outside coders to overwhelm their systems, reflecting the escalating tensions within the Bitcoin community over the network’s intended use.
The Impact of Inscriptions on Bitcoin’s Network
The rise of inscriptions has tangible effects on Bitcoin’s blockchain. Mempool Research reported in February 2025 that the adoption of inscriptions could drive Bitcoin’s average block size as high as 4 megabytes (MB) per block-far exceeding the current average of approximately 1.5 MB.
Larger blocks increase the storage and bandwidth requirements for node operators, potentially reducing decentralization by raising the barrier to entry for running a full node. This scenario worries many purists who believe Bitcoin’s security and censorship resistance depend on widespread node operation.
Broader Implications for Bitcoin’s Future
The debate over inscriptions encapsulates a broader philosophical divide within the Bitcoin community: Should Bitcoin remain a pure monetary protocol focused solely on value transfer, or evolve to support additional functionalities like NFTs and data storage?
While proponents of inscriptions argue they bring new use cases and innovation, critics warn that such uses risk undermining Bitcoin’s core properties and long-term sustainability.
Ammous’s willingness to fund development aimed at curbing spam reflects a commitment to preserving Bitcoin’s original vision and ensuring its robustness as a monetary network.
Conclusion: Community Efforts to Preserve Bitcoin’s Integrity
As Bitcoin’s ecosystem evolves, the community faces complex challenges balancing innovation with network health. The surge in spam inscriptions has sparked a vital conversation about how to maintain Bitcoin’s efficiency, security, and decentralization.
Support from influential figures like Saifedean Ammous and developers like GrassFedBitcoin signals a proactive approach to addressing these challenges. By funding dedicated development and exploring technical solutions like configurable inscription filtering, the Bitcoin community aims to safeguard the network against spam without compromising its open and permissionless nature.
