And to get further outside of any competence, if things like changing op return limits or other changes to bitcoin itself challenge (even indirectly) this essential attribute to finite, then they challenge the good of the imitation. All else equal (which is a very tall order) if a change seems to expand Bitcoin it may undermine this humility?
Login to reply
Replies (2)
Interesting thoughts! This is a new angle for me. It never occurred to me to associate finitude with humility in the design of bitcoin, and then think of bitcoin as a smaller image of God - which it must be, since everything is, to varying degrees of fidelity and scope. An infinite fractal has infinite variation, while still retaining coherence. In fact, that would still be the case even without God, based on cosmic expansion from the supposed big bang. I like it. Thanks for showing me this new side of this jewel emerging from hyperspace that we call bitcoin.
Ah, forgot part - as I currently understand the op_return thing, stuff put there is prunable. If that's wrong, someone please tell me, cuz that's really important I think. I've been mostly against the op_return change, because it looks like an inelegant solution imo - elegant would be reverting at least part of taproot or the witness discount - but if its prunable then it might not be as bad as it seems. Then the next question after that is : can lightning work (or be made to work) on a pruned node (currently no). My lack of knowledge here is forcing me to emphasize the "stay humble" part of Odell's phrase.