853 sats \ 10 replies \ @0xIlmari 6 Dec 2023 \ on: Luke Dashjr said that Ordinals & BRC20 will no longer exist on Bitcoin. bitcoin
I'm sorry, what's the "exploit" here? What's the problem he's trying to solve? Because to me, the network is working just fine, and the free market of fees is working as intended.
Bitcoin Core has a mempool policy limit on the size of extra data in transactions but inscriptions found a way to bypass it
The bypass is the bug
If your node is relaying transactions that bypass the limits you intended for it then it's not working properly
reply
You are incorrect.
Bitcoin Core has allowed extra data in transactions deliberately for many years. This tool of mine does exactly that to publish text, and was created prior to even segwit, let alone taproot: https://github.com/petertodd/python-bitcoinlib/blob/master/examples/publish-text.py
reply
Bitcoin Core has allowed extra data in transactions deliberately for many years
Sounds like a mistake I'd like to fix
reply
If you want to "fix" that you should at least propose a technical solution that isn't just a dumb cat-and-mouse game.
reply
But I don't have a technical solution
I can state my opposition and my reasons for it but persuasion is about all I can try to do right now because I don't know if it's even possible to fix it technically
reply
BTW, I'd like to add that his use of the word "exploit" is completely dishonest here. There is no actual exploit as in funds being stolen, or malicious remote code execution happening on nodes, nodes crashing.
It's just something he doesn't like, so he misues words, not unlike the US Government calling "terrorism" anything they want to crack down hard.
reply
I really have no dog in this fight but I if like @supertestnet says there is a bug (and this is the first time I'm seeing anyone say its a bug) then someone is exploiting it. An exploit has nothing to do with funds or even remote code execution. It can be that but it also can just be a bug in software that someone is able to exploit to a do something that wasn't intended.
The question is, is this a bug. Not is this an exploit. If it is a bug, then it is an exploit of the bug.
reply
What's being illustrated here is that even the term "bug" is a matter of sociological convention. Bug with respect to whose intentions? is the question.
From Luke's perspective, it's a bug. From other points of view, it isn't. From a legal point of view, In the USA, corporations have many of the same rights as people. Is that a bug? Depends on who you ask.
reply
Fair.
reply
Luke's argument is summarised in this PR description.
What others say is summarised in this comment.
These help my understanding, so just for information.
reply