Core is not a "decentralized" group lol. wtf does that mean? lmao Can I merge something to Core? Core are devs and some have control over the repo and merge access, not all of them, I can submit a PR and ultimately someone decides and allows a merge. So there is a well know group of Core devs and guess what they talk and get to consensus on needed changes. Antoine Poinsot said on record that citrea would need to include extra data and op_return would be the less harmful way.

Today I learned that Core is a "decentralized" group of devs, that have no contact or affiliation with anyone, I guess no one knows who they are and they probably live in some cave and have no access to the outside world. Maybe the are just AI bots with a random rotation of permissions. I guess we don't need to build trustless tech we just need a decentralized group of devs on a repo.

"... the demand for inscription incentivized people to build private bridges to miners to bypass other standardness limits such as the maximum transaction size in order to store even more data." "While these restrictions are not binding anymore for whoever wants to store data onchain, they still unnecessarily restrict constructions with time-sensitive transactions. Protocol designers want those transactions to be standard for a good reason: they don’t want to rely on private bridges for security-critical transaction broadcast. Those transactions need to relay properly on the more censorship resistant public network. It was recently brought to my attention that Citrea faced this situation with their Clementine bridge." source:

Antoine Poinsot

On relay policy and recent OP_RETURN drama

Relaxing restrictions on OP_RETURN is fine. Bitcoiners need to stop being so gullible.

... View quoted note →

LOL