Knots allows unlimited op_return size in consensus. The difference is only what you carry in your mempool.
That doesn't fix the real problem.
Discussion
No, the problem is control. Not that spam can exist.
Disagree. They fucked up the narrative by starting with a massive op_return so now we are stuck with arguing about accurate mempools.
There should be a limit on op_return size in consensus. Don't let them mess with your head.
There is no accuracy within mempools and never will be unless you think there should be a mempool authority. Some people have never heard of Disney and don't need to. Same thing goes for transactions that don't fit within YOUR computer's filter setting. Consensus (not
I do not claim to make that decision for other people's computers. If Bitcoin stops being a network I can transact freely upon because the consensus is to allow spam then, so be it.
I think you are missing the point. Your node has always validated unlimited op_return size blocks but the devs told everyone 80 was the limit. Having no limitations is just silly. If someone posts a 1tb op_return I want to fork.
They told node runners they were setting rules that they weren't.
Don’t bother.. people out here arguing wholeheartedly “removing the speed limit doesn’t change the laws of physics.” Like okay buddy what about changes in the traffic.
I don't know if you realize you are strawmanning my position but you might want to read more closely.
I read it all lol.. 'just your mempool, bro' is the gist of it, right? That is true.. until everyone runs the same filter and suddenly it’s consensus by ghost. Not a fork, just magically emergent orthodoxy. We’ve seen this movie veryyyy recently too. Spoiler: it ends with 4MB blocks and devs saying 'we didn’t do anything'.
Guy, this is already old. The only way to "fix" this is to have miners filter transactions which everyone seems to call "Censorship!"
It IS just your mempool bro, and if you want to dictate what other people can do with their computers let me know when your CCP application clears.
Funny how 'just your mempool' always ends up being 'just everyone's filter' once da VC-funded nodes push it. It’s a real shame.. Bitcoin maxis warned us, but y’all replaced verification with vibes and called it freedom. I feel for the newbie node runners who now gotta deal with 83-byte standards, 4MB 'not-a-blocksize' blocks, and 1TB of dev gaslighting.
Giving up is no way to get what you want.
You are breath to grave bound no matter your choosing. Give up, want, get, all these words recycle through the eons, but ig bitcoin fixes even this somehow :P
Man is nothing but a worthless void without struggle. If tomorrow the boulder was still at the top of the hill, I'd push it back down myself.
I absolutely have a selective mempool, I monitor it. To be clear, we are talking only about unconfirmed transactions. Nothing can be done about transaction validation without a standards change.
As for unlimited mempool (unconf txns) what do I care? It's your memory and storage.
The valid blocks is not the debate currently. That is the red herring being bandied about. This is about control options of your own mempool rules within your own machine.
It isn't a red herring, they are creating a misdirection so we don't even consider actual block size in the argument.
At this point I'm realizing that the end result of all of this is to effectively remove the op_return field altogether. I can start buying 1g op_returns tomorrow now that I know I was lied to about the limits. How many do I need to push before the entire network is pruned? If 100% of nodes are pruned who cares what is in mempool? If 100% of nodes are pruned who will buy op_returns?
If 100% of nodes are pruned we have destroyed the history of satoshis op_return in the Genesis block.