<p>Sure, there is a desire to avoid unnecessary load. But it is futile apart from cautioning people to avoid hurting the system during its growth phase.</p>

<p>In a system without identities there is no way to apply quota or ratelimiting per participant, and global ratelimiting only results in a denial-of-service attack. In practice the only thing that prevents spam is a free market; if people want to pay more for something than others, it will get in. This is independent of the type of consensus algorithm used to construct the chain.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-11-23T19:40:23.863Z
I think the consensus is aimed at achieving a global agreement on a single single state of the network and is related to **transaction confirmation** not **sending transaction**. So, consensus cannot prevent **sending spam transactions**. For an **unidentified** network, one of the approaches to make it costly is **transaction fee** as it's done in Bitcoin or Ethereum. But how about Spectre?
Questioner
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-11-23T19:42:38.830Z
Spectre has nothing to do with it. It's a replacement for deciding what the best valid chain is. It's unrelated to the economics of what people may want to put in the chain.
Pieter Wuille
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-11-24T10:10:35.330Z
So, do you mean is not possible to use Spectre as a cryptocurrency? when you say: _"It's unrelated to the economics of what people may want to put in the chain"_
Questioner
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-11-24T12:26:54.220Z
No, I mean that Spectre doesn't change anything. Start with a cryptocurrency with the most-work rule, replace that rule with Spectre... now everything related to spam transactions still holds.
Pieter Wuille
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-11-23T18:37:46.430Z
2018-11-23T18:37:46.430Z
Pieter Wuille
<p><strong>Spectre</strong> is a DAG based (directed acyclic graph) distributed ledger (a structure as an alternative to blockchain based distributed ledger). </p>

<p>Is there any mechanism in <strong>Spectre</strong> to <strong>prevent sending spam transactions</strong>?</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-11-23T17:29:20.977Z
Why is preventing spam transactions a goal?
Pieter Wuille
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-11-23T18:18:06.263Z
According to [Bitcoin wiki](https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Spam_transactions): "Spam transactions are transactions which create undesirable extra load on the network due to not following Bitcoin best practices ...".
Questioner
<blockchain><security><spam>
How Spectre tolerates spam transactions?
Questioner
# How Spectre tolerates spam transactions?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2018-11-23)

**Spectre** is a DAG based (directed acyclic graph) distributed ledger (a structure as an alternative to blockchain based distributed ledger).

Is there any mechanism in **Spectre** to **prevent sending spam transactions**?

**Tags:** blockchain, security, spam

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Why is preventing spam transactions a goal?  
> **username_0**: According to [Bitcoin wiki](https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Spam_transactions): "Spam transactions are transactions which create undesirable extra load on the network due to not following Bitcoin best practices ...".  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2018-11-23. Score: 0

Sure, there is a desire to avoid unnecessary load. But it is futile apart from cautioning people to avoid hurting the system during its growth phase.

In a system without identities there is no way to apply quota or ratelimiting per participant, and global ratelimiting only results in a denial-of-service attack. In practice the only thing that prevents spam is a free market; if people want to pay more for something than others, it will get in. This is independent of the type of consensus algorithm used to construct the chain.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: I think the consensus is aimed at achieving a global agreement on a single single state of the network and is related to **transaction confirmation** not **sending transaction**. So, consensus cannot prevent **sending spam transactions**. For an **unidentified** network, one of the approaches to make it costly is **transaction fee** as it's done in Bitcoin or Ethereum. But how about Spectre?  
> **username_1**: Spectre has nothing to do with it. It's a replacement for deciding what the best valid chain is. It's unrelated to the economics of what people may want to put in the chain.  
> **username_0**: So, do you mean is not possible to use Spectre as a cryptocurrency? when you say: _"It's unrelated to the economics of what people may want to put in the chain"_  
> **username_1**: No, I mean that Spectre doesn't change anything. Start with a cryptocurrency with the most-work rule, replace that rule with Spectre... now everything related to spam transactions still holds.  

---

