The Bitcoin Core Peter Todd developer suggested removing the arbitrary size boundaries on OP_RUTURN, while igniting intense discussion. The entire disaster reveals deep sections about the purpose and future of Bitcoin.
OP_RUTURN is an OPCODE code that allows the inclusion of small data loads in Bitcoin (BTC) transactions.
Bitcoin basic developers and community clash on OP_RUTURN borders
The Peter Todd #32359’s proposal must raise long -term restrictions on the amount of data that can be stored using OP_RUTURN, which is currently crowned at 80 byte.
one to The formulation of Satoshi Nakamoto theoriesTES, Peter Todd, argues that the change will simplify the Bitcoin Code base. The encryption developer also highlights its capabilities to improve efficiency without endangering the network.
Since OP_RUTURN outputs are not implemented, they do not exacerbate the UTXO output group that must be tracked by all the full contract of Bitcoin to verify the authenticity of transactions.
“Restrictions are easily overlooked by direct replacement and thorns from Bitcoin Core,” male In his comments GitHub.
According to Peter Todd, the formal nature of the higher limits would reflect existing practices and interest in use of benefits such as Sidechains and bridges across the chain.
Many in the Bitcoin community view change as a dangerous shift towards non -critical use of pioneering encryption. This reminds us 2014 OP_RUTURN WARS When it comes to unwanted messages, the developers forced to reduce the data cover from 80 to 40 bytes before raising it again.
This era has witnessed services such as Veriblock, the series is overwhelmed by data, which increases block sizes and transactions.
“Sidechain builders should not affect Bitcoin Core. Bitcoin on its basic layer is money and should only focus on money,” to caution William S, Founder of Botanix Labs.
William argues that changing the standard rules to make development easier to set a disturbing precedent, especially when there are already solutions.
Critics say the proposal is a betrayal of the basic principles of Bitcoin
Meanwhile, critics call the proposal in betrayal of Bitcoin foundational principles. One of these critics is Jason Hughes, who works in development and engineering in ocean mining. He accuses the opposition developers Steamrolling and ignoring the fears of the wider users.
Hughes said that the change could push bitcoin to be ancient Alex.
“Bitcoin Core is about to integrate a change that turns Bitcoin into Altcoin, which has no value, and it seems that no one is interested in doing anything about it. Piercing.
However, others are more optimistic, while some recognize the potential of this step to improve the network.
“Providing food for applications such as newspaper and bridges pays more transactions, which is good for the network,” rose Karbon, famous user on X.
This feeling depends on the assumption that people already go beyond the maximum anyway. The reverse reaction also sparked wider philosophical objections, some of which are similar to the ongoing ETHEREUM problems.
“Bitcoin should not follow the” L2 “road map. It is in fact, what killed Ethereum. Bitcoin is money and you should focus on it,” another user. Argue.
Amid discussions about the technical advantages of change, it may be difficult to contain social impact.
The suggestion has inflated long fears on the centrality of the developers and reconsidered the risk of alienating users who believe that bitcoin should remain very little cash protocol.
Whether the proposal moves forward or kiosks, the controversy reveals the increasing tension between bitcoin roots and pressure to develop.
Disintegration
In adherence to the confidence project guidance, beincrypto is committed to unprepared and transparent reporting. This news article aims to provide accurate information in time. However, readers are advised to independently verify facts and consult with a professional before making any decisions based on this content. Please note that the terms, conditions, privacy policy have been updated and the evacuation of responsibility.
