Nostr Web Client

I shouldn't need to say that. If you read the originating mailing list discussion that started the debate, then you'd know who Antoine is.

https://groups.google.com/g/bitcoindev/c/d6ZO7gXGYbQ

Yes, he's a bitcoin/lightning contributor and more.

Your original response was you acknowledging you responded before reading my post thoroughly. Now rather than clicking the link I provided that goes into detail the rationale for removing the OP_RETURN limit, you disregard it asking me to provide you reasoning for reading it. In doing so, you expose yourself for not knowing that the person who wrote what I linked to is the one that started the debate in the mailing list and thus have shown you also haven't read that discussion there either.

The logic for removing it is sound from a protocol perspective. Keeping the limit in place risks more centralization, more transactions moving to alternative relay networks, and more censorship. Both of which harms the network more than anything that would come from having no limit with OP_RETURN data.

"Honest actors?" Please, stop with that narrative. Pieter Wuille, Adam Gibson, Antoine Poinsot, Jameson Loop, Greg Maxwell, Sjors Provoost, and more...these are all highly respected developers in the community that have worked tirelessly to build bitcoin to what it is today. To insinuate they have nothing but its best long term interests in mind is unproductive.

supermass 8mo ago

sigh man get off your high horse..

you are nobody to me.

I am nobody to you.

you put a link here as a response with no context and I had no idea who it was from or what it was. I saw that antoine posted this on twitter and that’s when I read it.

i am not referring to core devs or contributors being bad actors. citrea et al, yes. Lopp has a conflict which is part of what started this all. he is also a shitcoin supporter generally so fuck him, sorry not sorry.

i agree the technicals are all sound. you can find my support for the maximization of the limit in various replies I’ve given, I will link them if you want.

it is the direction of the culture of the project that is in question for me.

I believe we are catering to bad actors on false premises, such as the premise that these transactions offer legitimate demand for block space.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Tyler Burns 8mo ago

In what way did the *proposed* change that was proposed on its technical merits alone not fit your desired "culture?" Conforming to your desired "culture" was never a requisite for protocol development. And you say I'm the one on a high horse?

Kayne 8mo ago

Taking the freedom of choice away from nodes and centralising control over Bitcoin so that bad actors can add bloat ware to the blockchain makes no fucking sense man.

It's a bad idea

supermass 8mo ago

yes, actually. the project has a culture as all groups of people do.

having concern for its direction is a valid concern as a user of the software produced.