Quote from: apogio on Today at 10:07:33 AM

Quote from: ETFbitcoin on Today at 10:00:49 AM

But don't forget technology continue to progress, so increasing block size doesn't always mean sacrificing decentralization.

Of course, but it seriously depends on where you live. Unfortunately some people live in countries that don't advance in the same pace. Meaning that poverty is too high to be able to cope with the technological progress...

That's true, i'm aware of gap between countries along with other factors such as average income and transport cost. Although it's hard to decide the lower limit to be used as consideration of raising block size.

Quote from: franky1 on Today at 10:43:19 AM

Quote from: pooya87 on Today at 05:19:12 AM

Quote from: DooMAD on November 21, 2023, 10:46:56 AM

Quote from: franky1 on November 21, 2023, 10:28:53 AM

Quote from: DooMAD on November 21, 2023, 10:00:26 AM

Clearly no one saw this current situation coming.

funny part is i was having lengthy debates with gmax and others in 2016 about the exploit-ability of "anyonecanspend" (unconditioned opcodes).. it is funny how things come full circle where core gods and their cult followers lie, deceive try to deny things to push their agenda using tactics that the person on other side of debate is lying and deceiving

because you, data in the blockchain proves whos right in the end.

Congratulations, one of your hundreds of Chicken Little "Sky is falling!" cries turned out not to be 100% wrong. Have a cookie. Purely by the law of averages, even a fruitloop like you has to get it right once in a while. Don't let it go to your head.

Actually the thing he quoted has nothing to do with this topic and the example chosen in that comment is actually wrong and the silliest one since P2WPKH (ie. OP_0 + 20 bytes) is literally the strictest SegWit scripts that exists and there is absolutely no way of exploiting it.

incorrect.. because there is no expectation of content in op_0
remember op_0 was not a strict segwit script.. because.. 2016... yep segwit wasnt even a thing!!

back then they had buzzwords for them called nops, nulls.. these days for the new subclass of opcodes of segwit and then the next subclass of opcodes for taproot they buzzword things like opsuccess

anyways
the very next bytes you can put in it is op_push4 which say the next bytes after that can be 4,294,967,295‬ bytes(4.29GB) which are only prevented by the block limit to ot actually be 4.29gb

so it can be abused in so many ways due to its openness at the time of writing it in 2016

Do you forget that transaction with size above 100KB (these days it's above 100 vKB or 400.000 weight units) considered as non-standard?