It was discussed at this event…not sure if in this debate. https://youtu.be/x-eUUC8Idaw
I recall it as just accepted as an obvious fact in passing.
Discussion
I disagree with Core on this one. No changes to OP return is necessary. I do not see any imminent degradation that would render #Bitcoin unusable. Do you see #Bitcoin becoming unusable if you don’t follow Core’s recommendations? If yes, how so? Is the UTXO set bloat your pointing out catastrophic, and renders #Bitcoin unusable at some point? If so when and how?
New implementations, can lead to unanticipated issues. We can see that in all areas of life not just #Bitcoin. What is anticipated as good later is proved to be problematic.
Unusable? No. Just increases cost of running a node. Raspberry pi nodes are a thing of the past already, for example.
Remember, the harmful attack shitcoins are succeeding with right now is only done because the easy less harmful attack was made difficult by policy.
Perhaps a consensus change is the right way to handle the attack…maybe require witness data to only contain valid signature data.
But I definitely recommend learning how utxo set size matters a great deal to ibd and block validation.
I definitely see your point. I’m on your side in regard to the attacks on #Bitcoin and would like to minimize it. I’m currently using umbrel on my raspberry pie with a 1 TB external SSD approaching capacity. I will have to buy a 2 TB card soon. I’m all for lowering the friction/cost for individuals to run a node. I also like to be very careful with any changes that are done to the network, as unintended consequences can result that were unseen.