I'd rather use english so that other people can follow and chime in if they want ๐Ÿ˜‰ You know you are the king of caveats, don't you? ๐Ÿ˜ You can't not take into account the technical aspect, because bitcoin is first and foremost technology. It would be like discussing about a painter without commenting on his paint strokes. See I'm not even contesting that there is "too much" ado about OP_RETURN, as probably there is never too much ado when it's about putting garbage in the blockchain. I am complaining there wasn't more rioting in the streets when people knew what taproot was going to bring on the table.

Replies (2)

dude I'm not saying NOT to take into account tehcnical aspect of course, what I'm saying is that I don't agree to limit the conversation to ONLY technical aspect. In the end the way you look at this op-return thing (the motivations that have been provided for it and the way the change has been "pushed") seems much more about "let's make more profit from non-monetary data" rather than "it is for the good of the network"
Also, I think the true nature of this change is becoming more and more obvious, just look at this BIP here. Does it look normal to you that Jameson Loop is dedicating so much time and energy in trying to discredit this BIP? To me is clear as day this change was push for VC to profit more, got nothing to do with improvement to the btc network
โ†‘