The world's largest decentralized network, #Bitcoin , built on the principles of financial freedom, decentralization, and open participation for everyone, suddenly introduces a very strange upgrade 😳, accompanied by a message that says: “Refusing this upgrade may result in legal or ethical consequences.”

This sounds like a dramatic headline, but it’s actually what’s written in the new upgrade proposal that has caused a stir in the #البيتكوين. community.

💻 #BTC is a network with participants, miners, developers, and an entire community that decides what changes are made. There is no “leader” or central authority. Any proposal is brought up for discussion, and if everyone agrees, it is activated.
But this time, the story was not ordinary 👀.

A well-known developer in the scene, named Luke Dashjr, submitted a proposal called BIP-444, aiming to temporarily limit Bitcoin’s use for storing non-financial data — meaning people might use the network to store files, images, or data unrelated to transactions 💾.
And his reason? Fear that some people might use the network to store illegal content, such as materials involving sexual assault or other crimes 😠.

But the problem isn’t the idea itself, rather the language used in the proposal.
The text includes phrases like: “Refusing the upgrade may expose you to legal or ethical consequences,” and “Those who refuse it may disconnect from the network to use an alternative currency like Bitcoin Cash.”
And here, 🔥, anger started to rise! Many saw it as a direct threat and a contradiction to decentralization and Bitcoin, which is a free network with no pressure, commands, or authority over the people.

On the other hand, supporters see this upgrade as necessary to protect full node operators (full node operators).
These are the people who have complete copies of the blockchain and could inadvertently get involved in digital issues if the network contains prohibited content.
For them, BIP-444 is a “preventive” step to safeguard the decentralization of the network in the long term 🛡️.

But opponents have a louder voice 🔊.
They say: “Today, the ban is due to illegal content, but tomorrow? It could be because of political content, or anything that a certain authority doesn’t like 😤.”
They see it as a gateway to censorship and a direct threat to Bitcoin’s identity as an open network for everyone.

🔍 The discussion is not technical.
Will the network gradually tilt toward centralization under the guise of “law and ethics”?
$BTC