is this the contiguous data argument? because my one liner above pulls and combines data non contiguously. It’s a pretty weak argument.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Not at all. It's the offering a path for bad actors to sacrifice their own self interest for the sake of community health is pure hopium argument.

if bad actors wanted to do harm at their own economic expense they would just put them in the format above, which filters wouldn’t stop.

If they wanted to be economical they would just use inscriptions.

both cases have nothing to do with op_return

So, it sounds like we're in agreement: since neither have anything to do with op_return, lifting op_return filters has nothing to do with disincentivizing non-standard use of inscriptions (i.e. bad actors).

yes i agree, which is why i also believe lifting op_return is a very small incentivization tweak for lazy, non bad actors to use op_return for their app protocols instead of something dumber like multisig pubkey outputs

I see: being too "lazy" to design your app protocol not to damage the health of the network qualifies as a "non bad actor".

“Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.”

At best, it's willful neglect - which is a form of malice; not adequately explained by stupidity alone.

Kaspa solves this.