In this whole controversy about OP_RETURN limits, I wish everyone could question themselves: does this action I'm taking helps make Bitcoin a better money?
I think that's the actual frustration behind the actions of many - being unable to stay focused on a simple, noble goal.
well said
There will always be Attacks.
We gotta be ready for every fight and come back stronger each time.
True HK vibe
Thanks Uncle, Bitcoin is money!
Good words, Uncle
we are most to think that.
But ego shout louder, for now at least
You're right to point out that many of the controversies surrounding #Bitcoin, such as the OP_RETURN limits, can distract from its fundamental purpose: to be a more efficient and accessible form of money
Exactly
Better than what? Fiat is shit, established well b4 1971 Bretton, bi-metallic standards worse see1919 gold fix.. so what’s the comparison? My mental bags informed me btc devs make dinosaur changes unless everyone else in btc ecosystem tells my brain otherwise.. lol perception management has trillions invested n the end result is you reading this and saying wtf :P
Thank you for weighing in. Im over my skis with these dev debates.
Its helpful when familiar faces take a public position to help others like me that are a little lost.
🧡👊🏻🍻
It seems people are ready to talk now and really debate with arguments, instead of just shout :
nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzp6pmv65w6tfhcp73404xuxcqpg24f8rf2z86f3v824td22c9ymptqqswwdaqp8sctlhdrt3sflv5fhnk2tzvnkdmmwf9j6zqsd6pqapxrucphenew
Removing OP_RETURN limits will ultimately not change anything because garbage data is already being inscribed in blocks at a lower cost as input data. It does however set the precedent that node runners should not be able to configure these things and that the blockchain is for any kind of data, not just financial transactions.
Does that make Bitcoin a better money? No.
- It makes people using bitcoin as money have to compete with people abusing bitcoin with shitcoinery for block space and increase fees.
- It bloats the UTXO set making nodes more expensive to run, ruining decentralisation, the thing that makes bitcoin not a shitcoin.
Adding an anti-inscription filter will make it harder (not impossible) to attack bitcoin in this way and sets a precedent that the blockchain is strictly for financial data. This aligns with the intention of the protocol as stated in the title of the white paper "Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System"
Does that make Bitcoin a better money? Yes.
- It makes it harder for people to use bitcoin as something other than money, keeping the block space almost entirely for financial transactions.
- It will prevent further bloating of the UTXO set, giving improvements in storage some time to catch up and ensure nodes remain (relatively) cheap to run.
What grinds my gears the most is that we had the period of stupid stamp transactions that were literally designed to bloat UTXO set and attention farm, yet there was zero interest in filtering that out.
I'm not familiar with that, is this kind of thing not mitigated by the dust limit?
holding devs responsible is part of our responsibility. not using code we disagree with is our right.
Yes friend! Even if in reality he doesn't need anything. It still has to grow a lot! But I think growth will be a natural thing. The road is already mapped out. ₿ it's inevitable
“The squeaky wheel gets the grease” comes to mind.
