Subject: Re: [bitcoindev] Relax OP_RETURN standardness restrictions

From: Sjors Provoost <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 2 May 2025 13:16:47 +0200

Op 2 mei 2025, om 02:14 heeft PandaCute <[email-masked]> het volgende geschreven:

> It feels weird—like some sort of attack or a bribe. One protocol is mentioned that would benefit from this change, and then an investor ACKs the PR. 

This is a misunderstanding. One that probably should have been better communicated, because I can see why it creates a bad impression.

The Citrea protocol does not benefit from this change at all! We're just asking them nicely to please use OP_RETURN and not bloat the UTXO set.

The cost difference between OP_RETURN and fake public keys is negligible for them. I try to explain this in more detail here:

https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/126208/why-would-anyone-use-op-return-over-inscriptions-aside-from-fees

We can only hope they do so, but why would they?  They already wrote the code, and now they have to spend engineering hours to deviate from their whitepaper design. For what, just to be a good citizen? Their developers are getting attacked for agreeing with this change. And since the proposal is controversial, they can't even count on this actually going through in time for whenever they want to launch.

As someone once said: we don't have the cards here.

- Sjors

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email-masked].
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/1B78AC90-E698-421F-AECD-32DBCDD8669A%40sprovoost.nl.