The idea was to make bitcoin censorship resistant and threat-modeled to resist government control, to make governments comply with bitcoin, not the other way around. If you want your chain to be government friendly ethereum and solana are waiting for you.
Discussion
Deeper point is that Bitcoin doesn’t need governments to comply with it. #Bitcoin changes the incentive structures that make coercion less viable in the first place. Over time, as people voluntarily move toward systems of truth and transparency, governments and institutions will adapt, not because Bitcoin asks them to, but because they must.
The only deeper point here is to determine what Bitcoin is. What is its purpose. Anything can be destroyed if its purpose becomes ambiguous. Progress comes from being deterministic about clear simple purposes to accomplish. I’ve been here since 2010. Historically, let’s make Bitcoin a data repo has never been a primary ethos goal and it has never done much to advance Bitcoin. It’s a distraction and a danger to what our purpose has always been.
There's literally nothing to suggest that Core wants to make bitcoin a data repo, seek help.
Fact: Core’s op-return data limit expanded to a point where new use cases and risks can emerge to dilute the established purpose of Bitcoin and threaten its trajectory towards peer to peer global money.
Meanwhile, even the best people on the Core side of the argument, people I have trusted and rubbed shoulders with, have not provided a response to concerns or explanation of benefits of any sufficient measure.
False. People have been able to upload data to the chain since almost the beginning when Satoshi first create op return in 0.1. Bitcoin resists governments and central authorities, it doesn't appeal to them. You need to understand safe harbor laws and how it protects node runners.
Come on dude no maximalists want uncapped OP return
There's fundamentally no difference, people will put things on the chain whether you like it or not.
You stated that my comment was “false” and then tried to substantiate your conclusion with information that was compatible with what I said 🤷♂️
I replied with information that disproves your comment. This is called english, learn how to use it.
Incorrect. I could’ve made this statement below, but the first part would’ve been irrelevant.
People have been able to upload data to the chain since almost the beginning when Satoshi first create op return in 0.1. Bitcoin resists governments and central authorities, it doesn't appeal to them. Recently Core’s op-return data limit expanded to a point where new use cases and risks can emerge to dilute the established purpose of Bitcoin and threaten its trajectory towards peer to peer global money.
No. You are simply incorrect in your assumptions that op return can create new use cases that dilute the established purpose of bitcoin. v30 is still the same bitcoin as v29. If op return alone could kill bitcoin it would have already.
Nobody is claiming the change “alone could kill bitcoin” the concern is with opening it to future attacks and diluting its purpose as money.
Ps. Of topic: your site is broken. Use https://pagespeed.web.dev/
Mechanic literally said v30 would kill bitcoin several times in tweets and on his youtube channel. Nothing about op return dilutes bitcoins purpose as money, what are you smoking. Are you having transacting because I can transact just fine.
I agree, but I also want to keep the hard drive on my node as small as possible. I am also not willing to implement a hardfork in order to do so.