I would say more generally and less judgmentally that if you can't run a node due to resource requirements then you can't run a node.  Your ability to not run it isn't made worse if the the other's people's data in the chain is Luke-Jr's holy donations to anti-contraception charities (oh sorry, one has to have coins to donate them...)  or if it's monkey jpegs.  In fact, if your limit is processing cost related or UTXO related (e.g. the minimum storage required to run a node) the monkey jpegs are strictly an improvement in your ability to run a node over other less stupid sorts of transactions-- just as Ertil says.  But in either case they are the transactions of a third party. This is why the ability to run a node is protected by the block weight limit and market competition for access to the available weight.  It shouldn't need further protection and if it did censoring this kind or that kind of transaction won't work even if you make the wild assumption that the censorship would be effective-- because the capacity will get used up by things that aren't censored (whatever they are) and leave you just as unable to run a node. I think it is a goal in the community to preserve node ability pretty broadly simply because even if you can *afford* to run a node, if it's costly you're much less likely to do so because the benefits from doing so are fairly indirect and distance (except for privacy and resistance to censorship by services, which any kind of light wallet is more vulnerable to). Maybe I should have just skipped this post-- Ertil said most of it, but some things are important enough to be worth saying twice!
I would say more generally and less judgmentally that if you can't run a node due to resource requirements then you can't run a node.  Your ability to not run it isn't made worse if the the other's people's data in the chain is Luke-Jr's holy donations to anti-contraception charities (oh sorry, one has to have coins to donate them...)  or if it's monkey jpegs.  In fact, if your limit is processing cost related or UTXO related (e.g. the minimum storage required to run a node) the monkey jpegs are strictly an improvement in your ability to run a node over other less stupid sorts of transactions-- just as Ertil says.  But in either case they are the transactions of a third party. This is why the ability to run a node is protected by the block weight limit and market competition for access to the available weight.  It shouldn't need further protection and if it did censoring this kind or that kind of transaction won't work even if you make the wild assumption that the censorship would be effective-- because the capacity will get used up by things that aren't censored (whatever they are) and leave you just as unable to run a node. I think it is a goal in the community to preserve node ability pretty broadly simply because even if you can *afford* to run a node, if it's costly you're much less likely to do so because the benefits from doing so are fairly indirect and distance (except for privacy and resistance to censorship by services, which any kind of light wallet is more vulnerable to). Maybe I should have just skipped this post-- Ertil said most of it, but some things are important enough to be worth saying twice!

I would say more generally and less judgmentally that if you can't run a node due to resource requirements then you can't run a node.  Your ability to not run it isn't made worse if the the other's people's data in the chain is Luke-Jr's holy donations to anti-contraception charities (oh sorry, one has to have coins to donate them...)  or if it's monkey jpegs.  In fact, if your limit is processing cost related or UTXO related (e.g. the minimum storage required to run a node) the monkey jpegs are strictly an improvement in your ability to run a node over other less stupid sorts of transactions-- just as Ertil says.  But in either case they are the transactions of a third party. This is why the ability to run a node is protected by the block weight limit and market competition for access to the available weight.  It shouldn't need further protection and if it did censoring this kind or that kind of transaction won't work even if you make the wild assumption that the censorship would be effective-- because the capacity will get used up by things that aren't censored (whatever they are) and leave you just as unable to run a node. I think it is a goal in the community to preserve node ability pretty broadly simply because even if you can *afford* to run a node, if it's costly you're much less likely to do so because the benefits from doing so are fairly indirect and distance (except for privacy and resistance to censorship by services, which any kind of light wallet is more vulnerable to). Maybe I should have just skipped this post-- Ertil said most of it, but some things are important enough to be worth saying twice!

I would say more generally and less judgmentally that if you can't run a node due to resource requirements then you can't run a node.  Your ability to not run it isn't made worse if the the other's people's data in the chain is Luke-Jr's holy donations to anti-contraception charities (oh sorry, one has to have coins to donate them...)  or if it's monkey jpegs.  In fact, if your limit is processing cost related or UTXO related (e.g. the minimum storage required to run a node) the monkey jpegs are strictly an improvement in your ability to run a node over other less stupid sorts of transactions-- just as Ertil says.  But in either case they are the transactions of a third party. This is why the ability to run a node is protected by the block weight limit and market competition for access to the available weight.  It shouldn't need further protection and if it did censoring this kind or that kind of transaction won't work even if you make the wild assumption that the censorship would be effective-- because the capacity will get used up by things that aren't censored (whatever they are) and leave you just as unable to run a node. I think it is a goal in the community to preserve node ability pretty broadly simply because even if you can *afford* to run a node, if it's costly you're much less likely to do so because the benefits from doing so are fairly indirect and distance (except for privacy and resistance to censorship by services, which any kind of light wallet is more vulnerable to). Maybe I should have just skipped this post-- Ertil said most of it, but some things are important enough to be worth saying twice!