pull down to refresh
202 sats \ 5 replies \ @2minutebitcoin OP 3 Sep \ parent \ on: OP_RETURN saga explained in 2 minutes (simply, non-technical) bitcoin
Yes - that scare is why it's such a big deal right now. It's a theoretical risk and people have varying opinions on it.
- Some people believe it could be an intentional attack on Bitcoin (creating this attack vector)
- Some think that you can't get in legal trouble just because the data is stored in a more obvious manner
The way this is handled is the concerning bit. Discussions aren't being too productive. The pro OP_RETURN change side in particular seems to be resorting to mockery, name-calling and straw-manning. We really need to have a proper debate within the space and at a minimum hold off on this change.
The community literally gains nothing from rushing in controversial changes to the protocol. It only damages it. Even if one side believes the controversy is unfounded and dumb, they would be smart to pause, take time and unite/align the community.
Some sick fuck is going to spam tons of CSAM into the chain. There are plenty of people hostile to Bitcoin who will do it just for kicks. This change is going to force a hard fork.
reply
reply
Bitcoin was built as neutral money. Run a node, verify transactions, keep it decentralized. That’s the moat.
But buried in the code is OP_RETURN - an 80-byte field meant for metadata, barely a fingerprint. Now groups are abusing it, stuffing 100kb files - images, videos, junk.
That flips the script. Node operators aren’t just verifying money anymore. They’re forced file hosts, pushing random content across the network. The baggage isn’t trivial: legal risk, reputational hit, technical strain.
And if governments start seeing Bitcoin not as money but as a content network? The fight changes completely
reply