Replying to Avatar Murch

The main reason to do it is the same reason as 2013: it's preferable for people to write into op_return outputs than into unspendable payment outputs. Dropping the limit makes OP_RETURN a reliable replacement for the latter which is currently standard and essentially unpreventable.

Data in OP_RETURN is significantly more expensive than data in inscriptions, so I have a hard time understanding the concern that the overall block space occupied by data transactions would increase.

Whether more should have been done about inscriptions seems like a separate debate that mostly muddies the water here.
Avatar
Crizzo 7mo ago

Have inscriptions been a risk for 12 years? Why did they only materialize two years ago? Taproot? I'm just trying to understand the history here.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Avatar
Murch 7mo ago

Theoretically you could have done the same reveal truck with p2sh, but the redeem script had to fit into a single 520 byte push. Segwit introduced the witness section and witness discount, Taproot removed the 520 byte limit for witness stack items. Altogether, you could then do big scripts for less in the witness.