Thread - Nostr Hypermedia

> if Liquid...[used] opreturn...is that spam? Yes, because in my opinion all op_returns with a data payload are spam > A Metaprotocol by definition is written on bitcoin Yes, but it does not necessarily occupy any extra space. For example, the RGB team designed their metaprotocol so that it can "piggyback" on financial transactions that were already going to happen anyway, and only *tweak* the fields in such transactions. That way, the extra data doesn't take up any extra space. I don't consider that spam. If nodes were going to store the same amount of data anyway by storing the tx *without* tweak data, tweak it, by all means. Then your metaprotocol can have whatever features you want without counting as spam per my definition, because it doesn't increase the amount of data on bitcoin. > Are you saying anything but a hash is spam A hash can be spam too, but it depends. The bitcoin protocol supports hashes for things like htlcs. If a metaprotocol used the hash of an htlc that was already doing to happen anyway, and put their metaprotocol hash in it, that wouldn't count as spam in my book. But if they created an htlc not because it was needed by a bitcoin tx, but because they wanted to put a hash on bitcoin for use in their metaprotocol and couldn't be bothered to piggyback, I would consider that slightly spammy. Though since it's only a hash in one transaction I would also consider it only *slightly* harmful.

↑ Parent

Replies (1)

Nuh 3 weeks ago

RGB doesn't work for everything that you want a Blockchain for, I don't think it works at all to showcase how smart contracts help L2s with fraud proofs etc... for many reasons, but let's just start with the data witholding. In fact there are zero interesting applications that RGB offers me, I don't want to create tokens. I only care about: 1. Experiments for L2 bridges 2. Possibly satisfying the demand for Stablecoins while still using Bitcoin as backing both for freedom and sustainability of Bitcoin with more value and demand. Neither of these are possible with RGB as far as I know, the next best thing is BMM but that is why I said that is not Metaprotocol. BMM is cool but there is a good argument that when you are already battling 2WP, might as well not also fight Data Withholding... Especially when you are aiming for a Metaprotocol (let's call it embedded consensus or embedded chain) that is not expected to require too much data (if you only use it as stepping stone to L2s). Is adding 10% of extra data really spammy if that is the goal? If we are affording some grace to Bitvm (which I often see spam concernors do) why not do the same for other attempts to break free of the endless "PrOvE tHe DeMaNd FoR CoVeNaNtS fIrSt". Of course one can argue that the demand could be proven on Liquid instead ... But I submit to you that people spent money on worthless Ordinals instead of doing the same on Liquid for a reason.

1 replies ↓