funny this was Ethereum. but they didn't like it after they ruined it. bitcoin is not block space, bitcoin is money. --- i had an idea of something i called nostrscript before all these bip110 arguments. during knots vs core. like people wanna have dns, nfts etc, but they wanna abuse bitcoin's double spend check protocol to abuse immutable nature of it. so i wanted design a protocol that stores the data with nostr protocol and anchor it to bitcoin timechain by aggregating them into a single hash, and also limiting number of anchors with pow. the protocol itself is also designed to isolate script states with cleaver dependency graphs. so dns people don't have to download nfts and etc. whole protocol, no matter how many people using it on average would create single sha256 hash per block on average. even payments were being done with lightning, so no other onchain overhead. i thought the fact its using lightning would make it easier to access, and would starve other malicious protocols.

We might need something like this for Bitcoin-BLAKE2b.

i mean building something like that on a chain that wants to stop it might be kinda wrong you know. if i do it i would unleash it on the legacy chain, would be bringing it to bitcoin only if we have the same issue on bitcoin yet again.

Idk. Incentives matter. It’s an economic defence mechanism rather than technological one, and technical mitigations have some blind spots and tradeoffs.

maybe with a few bytes prefix, so it would fit in 42 bytes limit easily.

Sounds more than reasonable to me.