Quote from: dexX7 on March 27, 2014, 04:03:31 PM

Quote from: BitThink on March 27, 2014, 09:55:13 AM

Actually quite sad to see this, and wish it will be never used. I understand why Devs implemented it, but this method introduces a lot of unspendable outputs and can never be pruned from the blockchain. Kinds of like ' if you don't let me to do this, I have no choice but to do the worse thing.'

Don't think this method cannot be filtered by bitcoin core dev. This is an open source project, any miner can parse counterparty protocol and filter it as easy as us.

BTW, even if we really want to use it, it's slightly better to use PayToPubKey instead. One pub key has 32 bytes, larger than 20 bytes (the size of key hash).

FYI: you could also use uncompressed pubKeys. 0400...0 is not a valid ECDSA point in the first place, thus it might be possible to drop the prefix, too.

https://blockchain.info/tx/2de38a49f0079d0aaa8a0b9cfec71b1af935752b609eee0dc1eae56b2162a7e2

, dexX7 must have dozens of nefarious tricks up his sleeves already if it ever gets to the cat and mouse game as someone puts it earlier.

What else does it take for the devs to realize that OP_RETURN is the OP_SCRIPT_SUPER_EXTENSION for transactions at the upper layers?
Instead the simple OP_RETURN is still being painted as just storing data when there are countless ways to do that already.