I don't think I've heard anyone argue that it's BIP110's code complexity that's the problem, it's what changing the code does or could do that people have issues with. A single lines change could easily have procedural, cultural, and game theory changes, both known and expected, and unknown and unexpected.
Replies (5)
Honestly it's not that it does too much. It's that it doesn't solve anything. At all.
And yea, it COULD have negative downsides. I actually don't think there'd be much.
But when it accomplishes nothing why risk any?
Demonstrating that consensus can be changed by disinfo and hostage tactics is damaging imho
It accomplishes what it intended to: closing the CSAM attack vector.
How so? Inscriptions are already bip110 compatible. Any spam protocol moves faster than bitcoin consensus.
"Inscriptions" are spam, not data/image storage, despite what the scammers want you to believe.
