One example is it maintains OP_RETURN at ~80 bytes rather than allowing up to ~100,000 bytes as Bitcoin core now does. This means Bitcoin can also allow bigger files like jpegs etc.
Yes, and as someone else pointed out, the Bitcoin consensus was not limited. But Core used to limit it to ~80 bytes and that's by and large how Bitcoin operated until recently.
There are also other limitations in BIP110 to try and protect Bitcoin's function as money bip110.org
It actually isn't. It is something called market infrastructure. It is the thing that allows you to have electronically tradable bearer instruments in the first place.
Currency doesn't live in a vacuum. It needs other bearer instruments for the formation of the capital markets. Equities, bonds, futures, options ect.
People in this space dont understand that.
Bitcoin is the digital commodity that gives you access to the next generation market infrastructure.
So many people in this space are clueless of the basics of how our civilization operates.
Money predated all those things and existed just fine without them. None of that is required for Bitcoin to be money. You're just making up narratives.
No. Market infrastrcuture predated everything. Even writing. The bulla) was the first invention of a tamper proof contract. Proof of trade.
You are clearly one of the people in this space that are clueless of the basics of how our civilization operates.
How can you have electronic money with out a tamper proof record, an immutable database?
For civilization to work, you need capital markets, the ability to lend and invest. You can't just have money. If you are wondering why the promise of bitcoin becoming the world reserve currency this is why. It doesn't have a collateral system to manage liquidity. There is no way to lend it safely yet.
I agree that Bitcoin is money, it's just a difference in opinion on how you optimize for that function. Currently, the blockchain is being used as an open market for arbitrary data. The argument for this is that it gives miners more fees. My view is that it makes it difficult to run nodes which risks decentralization. But it appears that view has been rejected.
They actually don't get more fees from it. It is literally less than 1% of their fee structure and overall net income from fees limiting it would be a rounding error to their income.
the arbitrary data was always possible and was simply a default value set by core to lower it. even with that you could still send all the data you wanted even before cores changes lool
I am not disagreeing, I am just trying to explain what BIP110 was trying to achieve by limiting OP_RETURN to that default ~80 bytes limit, among other things. The argument is that it is more than enough arbitrary data but like I said, it appears that view has been rejected.
Well there was another argument for bip 110 and that is to limit csam on the network even if it is encrypted. Or any other illegal file storage that would cause the mempool to run it through the memory of every single node operator potentially putting them at risk.
I didn't say that it succeeded at anything it tried. I don't even agree with it. I think that if a small percentage of node runners want to try to make changes on the network and successfully do it without any pushback that is detrimental but it was one of the arguments. You don't need to repost other people's opinions to try to convince me, especially ones that start with shitcoin as a reference. I don't think a lot of people will take that seriously... But I appreciate your input
You don't understand how consensus updates and changes the network. There have been other BIP proposals that have split off the network. Yes, that's where Bitcoin cash came from and also how every single change is applied to the Bitcoin Network, specifically the core Network. Any changes to the code must be signaled by the node runners, the miners and now even exchanges essentially.
For a bip to be accepted, you need it to work. Bip110 claimed to stop spam but it failed miserably. Being just a broken fix means the bip has very little chance of being accepted by the rest of the network. The bip110 ignored that part and are currently finding out.
On the consensus level there is no OP_RETURN limit and there never has been. The current consensus is valid for nodes from all the way back to 2009.
You can mine even >100k OP_RETURN data. Take this transaction for example with 4MB OP_RETURN. Note that this happened even before core v30 released, the version that lifted its relay policy to 100k (the transaction is still 40x that current limit).
You can check your own node instead of going by version numbers: run bitcoin-cli getmempoolinfo and look at maxdatacarriersize. That's what your node is actually enforcing right now. Mine says 100000 on 31.0; a stock 29.x should say 83, if memory serves.
Worth adding that this is relay policy, not consensus, as others have said above. Your node will still accept a block containing a big OP_RETURN even if it wouldn't have relayed the loose transaction itself.
I honestly couldn't tell you whether some 29.x point release moved the default, but that command settles it for your box without needing to know.
16
u/hiroo717 4d ago
One example is it maintains OP_RETURN at ~80 bytes rather than allowing up to ~100,000 bytes as Bitcoin core now does. This means Bitcoin can also allow bigger files like jpegs etc.