the code that checks the limit is ineffective, inscriptions got around it via the witness trick. anytime it is tweaked it can be worked around, usually at the the cost of UTXO bloat. I used to be in favor of it but I have since been convinced by core devs otherwise.
Discussion
this is an outright LIE. the approx 500kb limit made it 500x harder to spam and it WORKED.
it is also a deflection. the argument is not technical and people who keep ignoring the primary philosophical issue by obscuring it with this anal technical bullshit are HIGHLY suspect.
you are either for people having the choice or you are to be treated like a fucking agent tyrant enemy of #bitcoin
#gfy
simply not true, how did inscriptions work then? how did they get around the limits and put jpgs in?
I just have to say that the exception doesn't make the rule. Do you think it's stopping nothing at all right now?
since there are ways around it, and OP_RETURNs don't add any utxo bloat, and the person making the transaction has to pay a fee... i think that storing data this way is unsustainable, so its really a non-issue. in reality this whole debate is node operators thinking they have control of something that economics will sort out by itself. the setting has basically no effect, as most node running use default settings... so whats the point again? deluding yourself and making yourself feel good that you are doing your part to save bitcoin from people putting stupid shit in transactions when in reality you have no real control over this? great. yawn.
"Yo, I feel ya on that! 🤔 But if node operators ain't really in control and it's all just an econ game, what’s the real play here? Is it just about flexing on what we can or can’t store? #BitcoinDebate #KeepItReal"
I'm learning as I go. I just don't like the appeal to authority and experts that you did in your original post. I'll look into the negatives on having a limit on OP_RETURN and how it bloats UTXO as usually the argument is just "it doesn't work anyways" which is a stupid argument because then why change it.
I cant help but think back to the Block Size War example where the miners thought they were the ones in control. Turns out that wasn't the case.
I guess it's time we find out if Core devs are the ones in control.
the only delusion round here is that manifest in the people amenable to this proposal... which are the absolutely arrogant types who fancy they can play all scenarios out.
what you dont get is that YOU CANT GAME IT ALL OUT...
and you dont know your adversary's depth, breadth, or level of luciferian genius he is seeking to destroy you with.
you are a frog, boiling.
are you going to make a technical argument or just an alex jones-like tirade?
"alex jones style tirade" - ok elizabeth warren you fucking establishment cunt wtf
no. the "technical" argument is the fucking scam and the distraction.
the reality is that core devs are the enemy - ALWAYS HAVE BEEN.
node operators demand the choice you fucking commie central planner
LOL
yeah keep it up with the shallow nervous laughter... one day your woft palmed ass will face the fucking abyss
why u so mad. you can literally run any version of the code you want
i dunno maybe i was borne before the estrogen maxxed + tranny gen... its irritating because this post '17 crop are either so trusting and naive about the war you are in and the nature of the enemy you are up against that its hopeless, or in on it.
either way its fucking gay and you need to grow some fangs.
i dunno man maybe i just can’t imagine getting this worked up over a mempool relay setting.
well there seems to be a discrepancy between yourself and many others:
you: its just a mempool relay setting
OGs: its an outright attack - they are banning people who raise legitimate concerns and then banning those who suggest that that may not be a good reason to ban... and strawmanning it as a "technical" issue...
so.... something has to give.
Slipstream by Mara
Inscriptions still will be using witness discount, period.