Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP - limiting OP_RETURN / HF

From: Peter Todd <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2021 11:50:08 -0400

On Sat, Apr 17, 2021 at 03:57:55AM +0000, Christopher Gilliard via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> Thanks ZmnSCPxj. Yes, I agree there are many ways to embed arbitrary data
> in the blockchain and it's not feasible to block all of them. That is why
> it's important to, at the same time as limiting the OP_RETURN to one per
> block, also propose and implement a layer 2 solution for timestamping
> so people have a clear and simple upgrade path. That is what I will be
> discussing in one of the BIPs I intend to release early next week.

Note that an aggregated timestamping service already exists:

https://petertodd.org/2016/opentimestamps-announcement

But timestamping is useless for most things people want to do, as it can't
commit to a unique history. It merely proves something existed in the past. For
uniqueness, you need something like:

https://petertodd.org/2017/scalable-single-use-seal-asset-transfer

Anyway, at current fees being what they are there's no compelling reason to try
to prevent people from embedding data in the Bitcoin block chain with consensus
changes. Economics is preventing that just fine.

-- 
https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org