I understand the concern about miner incentives as the subsidy decreases, but opening up OP_RETURN or creating exclusive L2 blockspace to generate more fee revenue isn’t the solution. Bitcoin’s security should depend on genuine user demand for limited blockspace—rather than engineered fee streams or protocol-level hacks. If blockspace is valuable, the market will show that through higher fees or increased hashrate, the system naturally adjusts if it isn't. For those worried about spam, the solution isn’t expanding protocol-level data slots but rather improving node and mempool policies—using filters, not bloat. Security and spam resistance both come from keeping the protocol lean and market-driven, not from trying to out-engineer potential future problems.