-
@ Vic :Cacodemon: :doomguy:
2025-05-01 19:10:28
I can't comment on this PR directly as new comments are restricted to collaborators and I'm not adding any comments to the code itself which appears sound to my review
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32359
After careful consideration, I can see valid points regarding enacting this change as both being decentralizing and centralizing. On the decentralizing side, taking away limits announces to users that want large data that they can do it more privately without directly contracting with miners via out of band payments. Contrary, it may be centralizing due to increased network consumption of these larger transactions relayed around to node mempools which may be cost prohibitive to those with network connections of limited bandwidth. However, the same holds true for users embedding data via inscriptions in taproot type transactions. The PR does nothing to address the concern expressed over unspendable outputs and scriptsigs, and such commentary should be ignored.
My stance, at this time remains NACK, as the staus quo of how data is handled in OP_RETURN in Bitcoin Core is fine at its present size and warrants no change.
That said, if this change was merged, I'd be ok with running that code, in part because I'm not under extreme bandwidth constraints with my ISP at this time and recognize most aren't under quotas either.
I will consider replies and get to them in time if appropriate.
#Bitcoin #PRs