Chris is likely referring to my Citrea investment, which I've explained numerous times that Citrea doesn't need larger OP_RETURN to operate their protocol.
Login to reply
Replies (7)
Thank you for the response, I’m going to push back a bit, you say that Citrea doesn’t “need” larger OP_RETURN. My question is more along the lines of does Citrea benefit from larger OP_RETURN?. To be clear, my intent is not to attack your character, but allow you to respond directly as this is a common criticism I hear. I see a lot of people talking past eachother on this issue . Then devolving into personal attacks and emotional appeals.
Chatgbt and grok both disagree with this statement.
So why don’t you just stfu about it if you don’t care people run knots?
(Spoiler: he cares a lot.)
The question is why?
(Spoiler: incentive)
🧡👊🏻🍻
LLMs are retarded.
Here is post form sh who:
1. Is knots proponent
2. Knows what he is talking about (knowledgeable in bitvm)
It was Citrea, and AFAIK they plan to use utxo stuffing only if a bitvm contract is challenged. This is designed never to occur, as it requires someone to manually create and submit a "cheating" bitvm transaction, whereas "honest" bitvm software is designed to try very hard not to let you do that.
Besides the disincentive of manual work, it also carries a huge monetary disincentive: your counterparty in the bitvm contract is meant to be running software that automatically detects cheat txs and responds by taking all of the money the cheater put in the bitvm contract. (It works a lot like a lightning penalty tx, but more complicated because bitvm is complicated.)
Despite being designed never to occur, this potential for extremely rare utxo stuffing by one party has been leveraged to relax the op_return limit for everyone. Which I think is silly.
View quoted note →
I haven't done the math in a while, but the answer is that the benefit is so marginal that it is effectively zero.
First off, we're talking about 160 bytes of data.
Secondly, it's only used if a specific dispute resolution process gets triggered. And the incentives are in place to make sure the validators try their best to prevent it from triggering. So it's expected to happen extremely rare, possibly never.
What a disgusting liar. Citrea started this shit with Antoine because they needed OP_RETURN bigger than 83 Bytes.
Great! We don’t need it either! 🙂