Replying to Avatar Aaron van Wirdum

Core is Bitcoin's de facto reference implementation to the extent -- and _only_ to the extent -- that users treat it as such.

If you don't believe that to be true, what was the point of switching to Knots in the first place??
Avatar
jgbtc 1mo ago đź’¬ 1

I'm talking about what he meant by "official" and you latching on to that word, ignoring the rest of his point. Core, as the current and original reference client, should retain a reasonable default limit on op_return. Care to respond to that or just argue semantics some more?

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Avatar
Aaron van Wirdum 1mo ago

I’m not arguing semantics, it matters.

I and many others have explained this already, many times, including in the video this thread is a response to. I recommend watching it.

You can also read the article I myself wrote about this a month ago, in particular the “Bitcoin Core perspective” of course: https://bitcoinmagazine.com/technical/bitcoin-core-or-bitcoin-knots-what-the-op_return-debate-is-actually-about

Or read what the Bitcoin Core developers wrote about it themselves: https://bitcoincore.org/en/2025/06/06/relay-statement/

If you prefer that I explain it to you again that’s also ok, but then I’ll start charging for my time. Shoot me a DM in that case!