pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @standardcrypto 4h \ parent \ on: ANOTHER example of the REAL reason for removing the OP_RETURN 80-byte limit bitcoin
what darth said, mister punk ass cheap shot.
my momma gave me that name.
well intentioned.
rusty is a great guy who has shined the light of his dedication and skill on many worthy endeavors.
but this is not wanted.
great if they did it but it's a pretty big ask.
who is running the mint?
if it's signal now they are in the cross hairs of Fincen/FATF for kyc/aml.
if you can specify a mint in the settings this is going to attract a lot of fraud, how do you know which custodian to trust?
core policy is rational and more to the point, how does running knots help?
it all gets relayed anyway.
all you are doing is helping Luke recruit for his mining pool, and I don't think it's even helping him that much.
op return drama posting is turning into spam that doesn't even make any money.
yeah that would slow Bitcoin down by about a week and generate a lotttt of positive PR for Microsoft in the developer community /s
I feel the same way.
invaluable for his contributions. now his heroic reputation and accomplishments are deployed for negative goals.
you are primarily inconveniencing yourself with this impossible to articulate or implement policy which solves no concrete problem.
A byte is a byte. The bible is 4 megabytes, could fit it in a single op_return for a fat block.
How many bytes is too many? No dictator, however benevolent, can say.
Only the market can figure this one out.
Thanks for digging this up.
Can you also do some reddit bitcoin / bitcointalk archaeology to find where lukejr (or his original pool, elijius I think) was putting bible verses in blocks using op_return, or however they did it? Ridiculous and discrediting if true. (But I couldn't find it. But I didn't look that hard.)