Quote from: ETFbitcoin on April 28, 2023, 12:14:45 PM

IMO it's not good comparison when inflation bug is caused by implementation bug on Bitcoin full node software[1].

you're probably right. the inflation bug was not a consensus rule. Embarrassed

Quote

Meanwhile those who write BIP 342 intentionally remove limit which exist on previous type of Bitcoin script[2].

but why would they do that? i wonder if any of them considered a use case where it could be used as data storage and were they ok with that? i just dont' get it. maybe they didn't think something like ordinals could sprout up to take advantage of that and become so popular so they kind of opened up a pandoras box looking back on it? maybe that's what they think now or maybe they ok with it still i guess we'll never know. but if we look at their rationale here below it seems like they were oblivious to what is happening now:

Why is a limit on script size no longer needed? Since there is no scriptCode directly included in the signature hash (only indirectly through a precomputable tapleaf hash), the CPU time spent on a signature check is no longer proportional to the size of the script being executed.

Quote from: DooMAD

By the same logic, if a car can be used to mow down a crowd of people in a terrorist attack, should we treat all motorists as hostile entities?

no but i'd say to still use defensive driving.

Quote

Would you introduce a law that states a road can't be used like this (https://youtu.be/3yDjaj2zP9U?t=5Cool due to the inconvenience it may cause to other road users?

i dont know how often something like that happens but i don't think other motorists would be too happy being stuck behind that thing. maybe they need to compensate affected motorists stuck behind it by handing out some money. Shocked

Quote

It's a question of 'fair use'. Some people genuinely believe (even if it's completely ridiculous to us) that these stupid pictures have value. Their intent may not be to attack Bitcoin, so you can't just leap to that conclusion simply because you disagree with what they are doing.

well i think it's more of a question of "intended use" did the developers intend to allow this type of use case for bitcoin? if so then they should put it in the bip to admit it. if not then they should patch the hole. being transparent is important. it's not enough to be open source...