You're absolutely right, BTC is indeed the best money.
But your concept of "the entire Bitcoin technical community" ignores the fact that there is another "entire group" that disagrees with what Core developers are doing.. Core is allowing Bitcoin to deviate from its function of being money by forcing my node to act as a permanent Dropbox for people who aren't using it as money..
BIP110 corrects this, and returns Bitcoin to being the best money.
I have no opinion on nostr.
If you think people are using bitcoin as a drop box, then nothing about bip110 fixes the issue. Anyone who is willing to go through the process and expense to use bitcoin in this manner is not going to be stopped by the changes. You can still store as much data on chain as you want in a post 110 world. It will be slightly less practical.
On the downside you will prove that a retarded influence campaign can modify Bitcoin.
Thanks for the ad hominem 👍
The whole point is to make it less practical.
The policy filters were doing a halfway decent job of keeping spam out.. it wasn't 100% effective, but it at least created a barrier against low effort spam.
But Core rolled out the red carpet and now even allows the low effort spam in.
Think of it like an ad-blocker. They're not 100%, but they do a decent job. It's better than NOT having an ad-blocker... The problem is that the entire node network needs to run the filter for it to work.
There have been zero large op returns in January….because large op returns are not desirable.
I just checked my node. Here are the violations according to the BIP110 rules for January 2026:
Witness element over 256 b: 0.2428%
Output over 34 b: 0.117%
Taproot annex: 0.0009%
Data push over 256 b: 0.0005%
Op_return over 83 b: 0.0005%
Control block over 257 b: 0%
The total sum of bytes over these limits is 681 Mb this month. 99.8% of that excess came from inscriptions.
It sure would be nice if the excess data was in a provably unspendable and prunable part of the ecosystem.
You cannot stop transactions you don’t want. They can simply make them smaller and more numerous which ironically will bloat the chain even more.
Forcing them to split the witness elements across many transactions increases the cost of spamming the network. That would mean fewer people do it. It also means more money for miners.
The biggest win would be that it would effectively kill the image/audio/video inscriptions. Only the text based inscriptions would be practical after being split.
But ultimately the point is to send a message to them that non monetary transactions aren't welcome. But instead Core chose to open the doors for them.
If money for miners is a consideration than encouraging spam should be the policy. You can’t have that argument and be anti spam. Splitting the transactions doesn’t stop images and video. Data is data. If a video has to be compiled from a million transactions it is trivial to design a system that does that.
From my perspective I much rather have data in op return that can be ignored than to have millions of transactions that can’t. I do not believe sending a signal that Bitcoin doesn’t like spam is going to change anything. I don’t think changing this stuff actually matters all that much. Feels like virtue signaling at best.
Imagine what the transaction cost would be on sending a video in a single transaction instead of 1000 transactions. That sounds like a deterrent to me.
You could use the entire block in. Single transaction and you would have a video of less than 4mb at a cost of over 3k usd. To do the same thing in 10000 transactions across several blocks the cost would be 2x to 2.5x more expensive and. cause 30% more chain bloat. In the end it’s a short low quality video that’s impractical beyond novelty. Having it broken into small pieces doesn’t change anything beyond the cost and bloat.
I guess you have to ask yourself if 30% more chain bloat is a reasonable trade off for your virtue signal?
