pull down to refresh

21 sats \ 0 replies \ @hgw39 4h \ parent \ on: Quick questions about OP_RETURN? Quick answers here. bitcoin
Hi Murch. Your answers here have really helped me understand more about OP_RETURNs in general, and this issue, so thanks. Here are my questions. Given the 3 ways data can be embedded in the blockchain, how effective against each of these methods are the actions proposed in the PR? My understandings are:
  1. Writing data to a taproot leaf script. Lifting the OP_RETURN limit will not provide an attractive alternative for people embedding data, for any data above 143 bytes. So not effective against most arbitrary data.
  2. Data in the output script using the OP_RETURN op code. Lifting the limit seeks to encourage more data to be embedded using OP_RETURNs, as the current limit may prevent some data from being propagated around the network as it becomes non standard. (But can be worked around by going to a miner out of band)
  3. Embedding data using fake public keys or hashes. Does raising the OP_RETURN limit offer an incentive for this kind of embedded data? Does it become cheaper using OP_RETURN or not?
I'm trying to focus on the logic and incentives of the proposal, not the emotion and blah blah.
And one final question, why is this company Citrea being cited so much in this PR and discussion? I see Core Devs linking to their Whitepaper in the PR and I wonder why a single company's use case and requirements are being considered to heavily in this discussion. Shouldn't that be a non factor for a Bitcoin Core PR?
Anyway, thanks for helping out with these questions.
write
preview