π–‹π–Žπ–†π–™π–‰π–Šπ–“π–Žπ–Šπ–— (Β―`◕‿◕´¯)'s avatar
π–‹π–Žπ–†π–™π–‰π–Šπ–“π–Žπ–Šπ–— (Β―`◕‿◕´¯) fiatdenier@fiatdenier.com 3 months ago
This is exactly the arguments from the miners. You want to make it easier for them. I don’t. I want to make it harder it is for these junks to propagate and hopefully will deincentivize miners to mine them. At the end of the day, you can’t tell people what to run. They will switch to knots, stay at 29 or just fork off. What will that achieve for core?
↑ Parent

Replies (2)

jb55's avatar
jb55 _@jb55.com 3 months ago
If core makes it harder then people will build around it. Core is just accepting economic reality while knots want: to try to censor and control something they really have no control over. Its communism.
π–‹π–Žπ–†π–™π–‰π–Šπ–“π–Žπ–Šπ–— (Β―`◕‿◕´¯)'s avatar
π–‹π–Žπ–†π–™π–‰π–Šπ–“π–Žπ–Šπ–— (Β―`◕‿◕´¯) fiatdenier@fiatdenier.com 3 months ago
Removing 80-byte OP_RETURN limit doesn’t automatically make Bitcoin’s network more efficient β€” in fact, it could make it less efficient by introducing bloat and weaken decentralization. This will lead to higher costs for running full nodes and eventually to centralizations of both miners and nodes. They will be controlled by a few big entities. If that happens, Bitcoin failed. Is that what you want?
1 replies ↓
↑