Bitcoin Not Crypto:
Cores side of the #Op_return Debate Explained #Node

BTCCLUB / ausbtcclub: #OP_RETURN
80 byts to 100,000 byts is a 1250x increase. In what world would you make a change 1250x larger without gradually increase and testing?

80 grams of sugar won't kill a man.

100,000 grams of sugar would kill 1,000 people.

The worst part is Core are not open to debate. The downgrade to v30 is all the care about...

source #OP_RETURN

BTCCLUB / ausbtcclub:
RT by @ausbtcclub: It's a very well-publicized increase in the #OP_RETURN allowance that very publicly invites more non-financial data onto Bitcoin. Even though apps can already put data in other parts of Bitcoin, this increase sends a signal inviting more such data. Without adding safeguards to allow archival node operators to non-disruptively delete illegal content for which they will often be held criminally liable.

List of technical people against relaxing the #op_return filter

#Node Iniciante/Beginner/Principiante » Share

stacker news ~bitcoin:
Parker Lewis vs Antoine Poinsot: filters and #op_return

stacker news ~bitcoin:
The REAL reason for removing the #OP_RETURN 80-byte limit
#AVM

#Node Iniciante/Beginner/Principiante » Share

Bitcoin University:
#OPRETURN Prophecy Fulfilled (Bitcoin)

#OP_RETURN@TutorialBTC

#Node Iniciante/Beginner/Principiante » Share

🤣 #Bitcoiner Veterano (Raiz) vendo #Bitcoiner #Treasury dizer que discutir sobre #OP_Return é FUD.

Chegou agora, já quer "sentar na janela". kkkkk

Devia rever o que acontecia em 2017 (Ano ATH, explosão de pirâmides e guerra dos blocos).

Quer participar da discussão? Rode node.

#Node Iniciante/Beginner/Principiante » Share

Max Keiser

Two obvious failures of #Op_Return:

1. Adding ‘utility’ to Bitcoin diminishes its standing as a more perfect form of money. (I’ve written lots on this topic).

2. Increasing Blocksize increases centralization, again, diminishing its role as a more perfect form of money. (Read, “Blocksize Wars”) https://twitter.com/coryklippsten/status/1979713088346828970#m

https://xcancel.com/NickSzabo4/status/1979684180171890838#m

BTCCLUB / ausbtcclub:
Let me ask a question about Lopp , he blocked me so I can't tag him.

1. #Citrea required more visibility so #op_return was increased.

2. Lopp is a shareholder of Citrea.

3. If op_return was untouched, who cares because no one was apprently using it anyway?

4. If #opreturn was increased by 1250x, there is another avenue to use anyway through Taproot inscriptions.

5. It appears Core made a change for a private entity that would financially benefit from this change, so does its shareholder...


#Node Iniciante/Beginner/Principiante » Share

BTCCLUB / ausbtcclub:
🧱 What Happens with an Increased #OP_RETURN to 100,000 Bytes

1. Current block size:
Each Bitcoin block can hold about 1 million virtual bytes (~1 MB) of data.

2. Normal transactions:
A typical Bitcoin transaction is about 300–400 bytes, so each block fits roughly 2,000–3,500 transactions.

3. What #OPRETURN does:
It lets you store extra data (like text or files) inside a Bitcoin transaction.
Every version OTHERTHAN v30 right now has this limited to about 80 bytes, which is tiny.

4. v30 op_...


#Node Iniciante/Beginner/Principiante » Share

source #OP_RETURN

Parman 🔑 Bitcoin Self-Custody Mentor / parman_the:

Exposing more lies from Coremunists...

Don't let them fool you into believing filtering is a slippery slope to censorship.

There is no subjectivity in filtering ARBITRARY data. It is easy to define what "arbitrary" data is, eg, EVERYTHING in #op_return, or EVERTYTHING in an IF(FALSE) block (inscriptions). Even if that arbitrary data has something to do with the transaction in a higher layer, that layer is not Bitcoin, it's a layer, and remains arbitrary data, not monetary base layer.

None of the arbitrary data contributes to moving satoshis using the Bitcoin protocol. It's like a bank teller rejecting a cheque because you've drawn pictures on it. The money isn't censored, you can simply re-write the cheque without the graffiti.

Now, if you start trying to read the arbitrary data and filter based on that, then yes, it's subjective and you're policing data based on preferences - this is the strawman argument that Core Groupies like Adam Back are pushing. The fallacy is retarded at best, malicious at worst.

You can simply filter all arbitrary data (set datacarrier=0, and run ordinals patch by Luke; or run Knots) -- You are not making any subjective decisions, and there is no slippery slope.

You are simply defining your node as one that supports Bitcoin as money, not a general data relay client. It's not censorship to have rules of the house. You make the rules to your house - don't be pushed into deciding that Bitcoin needs to be an arbitrary data relay client.

Don't even listen to me.
YOU decide.
Not me, not Core, YOU.

https://xcancel.com/parman_the/status/1981018014989566062#m #TB


#Node Iniciante/Beginner/Principiante » Share