Subject: Re: [bitcoindev] Relax OP_RETURN standardness restrictions

From: "'nsvrn' via Bitcoin Development Mailing List" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 03 May 2025 05:14:45 +0000

Lightning network already has existing users, why should they agree with relaxing the limits for the other protocols like the one in question for whatever new use cases that aren't even interested in or aren't even monetary use-cases?

Most of them pitch that adding something equivalent to EVM to Bitcoin will help gain Bitcoin more market cap because it doesn't have enough market cap in the crypto. Nice pitch to their investors may be, but not so much to *existing* users of Bitcoin network and lightning.

Additionally, I would like to understand as a user - what will be the quantification for success of this change? If there's increased oversized op_return usage, you can claim - see that worked. If there's none, you can claim - see filters were indeed ineffective. It might not be starightforward to quantify if there are multiple startups trying to insert variety of data(data and commitments of data) in different ways and sizes.

Also, it is being said users who want to retain these options can transition to Knots but what it is not said is that users who don't want these can also transition to Libre Relay. You can then see overtime if usage of Libre Relay is growing or not to take some hint.

On Friday, May 2nd, 2025 at 10:05 PM, Peter Todd <[email-masked]> wrote:

> 
> 
> On Fri, May 02, 2025 at 04:34:45PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> 
> > I don't share that concern, personally. Data storage is far more
> > efficiently done outside of a blockchain (or more cheaply done on
> > non-Bitcoin blockchains), and for any legitimate use case, avoiding
> > wasting money on inefficient designs or unnecessary engineering projects
> > lets you capture more of that value as profit. For scams and frauds,
> > that doesn't apply, but scams and frauds only last until your pool of
> > victims grows wise to your shenanigans.
> 
> 
> I need to point out that Citrea, and plenty of other projects similar to
> it, is not using Bitcoin as a data storage mechanism. It's using Bitcoin
> as a data publication mechanism. What's important is by putting data
> in the Bitcoin chain, we've proven that the data has been widely
> published to a well defined audience of participants who would need to
> see that data.
> 
> Even Lightning does this: HTLCs work because they ensure that data is
> published in a way that allows others in the HTLC chain to be guaranteed
> to see that data in a timely manner.
> 
> -
> https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
> 
> --
> 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/aBUPFvXVhR3WoyPC%40petertodd.org.

-- 
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/Xw4wydsck5vp5fdVcyK8C7hmiNsRfUVveJjyJIZHJitIpo-K4MqOwu8g6c4GcN2Kq_3NrtdhbUeuv_BOveocZfdWjzjega321LKfzEQNGU4%3D%40pm.me.