Nostr Web Client

I have seen a number of people I actually respect now openly supporting core. I slept on this and realized I might have jumped to one side of the OP Return debate faster than necessary.

The debate has been framed by the knots team as Bitcoin being transformed into a platform by adding more non-financial uses to the blockchain. After 15 years of watching non-financial shitcoins trend towards zero with no practical uses cases emerging from the carnage I have absolutely no desire to add that functionality to Bitcoin.

However, it is possible that I am missing something so I'm going to ask a few questions for clarification if anyone wants to offer a response.

FYI I have no interest in debating with salty keyboard warriors. Please take a deep breath before posting. I just want to read the positions.

1. Is there a technical reason why the code needs to be altered now?

2. Who stands to benefit the most from OP Return space increasing?

3. Outside of BRC tokens and Inscriptions, what proposals are in place use of the added OP return space?

#asknostr

At the end of the day I'm not going to get upset about this, but my understanding will determine how and when I upgrade my node software. These discussions are valuable for bitcoin and will make it stronger in the long run. Much love 💜🧡

nostr:nevent1qqsf486nhzm5d6mdd8k4087zf33xl9ayg8mllfsxsreq3fccc75mkgqpz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduhsygyjva2962ghhq8hqllak39gl7terqjk3mmm4gzwuattruqafcmg3gpsgqqqqqqsr8evs9

semisol 7mo ago

1. There is not, from my perspective. The relay policy for OP_RETURN takes minimal effort to maintain and has no risks.

2. Lazy developers that want to store less than 1KB of data on-chain. With inscriptions, they need 2 TX, while now they can do 1 TX.

Otherwise, large inscriptions still are 4x cheaper if done with SegWit instead of OP_RETURN, so no one will stop doing that for jpegs.

3. There are none so far I am aware of that do not involve the sole purpose of data storage or tokens.

Current use cases such as OpenTimestamps, Silent Payments, etc can all operate within 80 bytes.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Sourcenode 7mo ago

Very funny to see your reply now because I was scrolling your feed after your last note to see if you took a public stance.

While I'm not super technical I can see the incentives and I agree with what you said here. I might add that miners could potentially benefit by increasing demand for block space using non-financial (shitcoin) activity. All seems hypocritical and dangerous in my opinion. Even the accidental loophole created by Taproot caused a big mess for a short period of time. This seems like it would open the floodgates.

I'm still having a hard time understanding why anyone wants to increase OP Return or support Core's desire to do so, but I'm remaining open to hearing an explanation that doesn't sound like nonsense.