Cool, so people could use Nostr instead of OP_RETURN, good point Lopp.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Sure, as long as you don't actually need data availability guarantees.

Oh? Explain the difference between relays and nodes in terms of data availability. I'd love to know.

Relays have no reason to hold old data. At least some nodes will likely always have the whole chain, at least for a long while.

But how much guarantee do we really have (or how far into the future is reasonable to assume?) if OP_RETURN data is pruneable?

ThesePicturesAreTheSame.JPEG

So the guy who argues we should all just run pruned nodes is worried about nostr notes getting deleted?

I don't know what you are saying, or implying.

He is arguing op_return has better data availability than nostr relays while pushing for changes to Bitcoin that would cause everyone to run pruned nodes, which would delete all op_returns from those nodes.

I didn't hear he wanted people to run pruned nodes, that's such a lazy response. I don't understand how he can be so great on cyber security and basically play dumb on this.

Maybe he's typing back really slowly

I forget if it was him or some other supporter. Argued that tons of giant op_return are the preferred way to store arbitrary data because it can be most easily pruned.

Preferred for people who don't want arbitrary data on chain at all Ideally. People who do want arbitrary data are unlikely to see giving up the witness discount to put their data in the field no one actually stores on their node as ideal.