Nostr Web Client

Your first lines are not unconventional, I agree...

But you continue with arguing Bitcoin will selfregulate to enforce smallest transactions due to cost efficiency?

To argue it is up to the user what is worth transmitting on chain, and that the user should have the freedom to transmit larger transactions than minimally needed (multi sig).

But the core problem is the blockchain size is a performance aspect, just as block size is.

And the bigger the blocks I've or blockchain the less decentralized Bitcoin will become (potentially)..

So as I have learned from the blocksize war decentralized is the most important feature.

Thus we have to limit the blocksize and blockchain to a minimal but workable size.

So functional requirements (multi sig) ahould be allowed, while adding pictures is not functional (and some will disagree to that since it was very profitable to do so for a while).

So we can't surpass the need to define what is allowed/makes sense. And better error to the low side to extent it if needed.

To state Bitcoin is a self regulating system based on efficiency ignores bad actors that can spend endless money to disrupt Bitcoin ?

jimbocoin 🃏 8mo ago

To be absolutely clear: I am NOT advocating for an increase in block size. I agree that that would be bad.

Releasing the OP_RETURN size limit does not increase block size. It doesn’t even change what’s valid on chain. It just means that the OP_RETURN portion of a transaction can be larger, and still transmitted by nodes before confirmation.

A person wanting to use OP_RETURNs to store data can already store as much as they want (within the block size limit of course). The consensus rules don’t place a limit on this (to my knowledge). So you could already, today, make an enormous OP_RETURN and mine it yourself, or pay a miner out-of-band (like slipstream).

The hullabaloo over the OP_RETURN limit is about node *policy*, not consensus. It is the current policy of Bitcoin core nodes not to retransmit certain valid transactions. For example, zero-fee transactions are automatically discarded as spam.

In this vein, transactions with OP_RETURNs larger than 80 bytes are dropped by Bitcoin core nodes, even though they’re legit transactions on the consensus level. The change being discussed is removing that *policy* limit.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

FreeYoda 8mo ago

Not increasing block size, but does increase blockchain needed to download during the sync of a node ?

Still a not wanted negative I think.

jimbocoin 🃏 8mo ago

No, the block size limit is the same no matter the purpose of the bytes. Bigger OP_RETURN has no effect on data *transmission*, but it does improve data *storage* since nodes can safely drop them.