Quote from: ETFbitcoin on Today at 09:44:04 AM

Quote from: Wind_FURY on Today at 09:10:27 AM

Quote from: ETFbitcoin on December 29, 2023, 08:22:04 AM

Quote from: Wind_FURY on December 29, 2023, 08:09:47 AM

--snip--

1. While it's true you can prune witness data, AFAIK there's no full node which let you do that.
2. It's still waste of block size since Ordinals TX has size more than 0. Possibility of pruning witness data actually means it's not waste of storage space.

The point is Ordinals embeds data in the structure of the blocks that store witness data, not the part of the block where the UTXO set resides. In that context, I don't know what's "wasted" because none of the embedded data is "stealing" space from actual Bitcoin transactions. Plus as a consensus rule, the block size is regulated up to 4MB. It's allowed to be that large.

What? There's no part of block dedicated to store UTXO set. UTXO set is created by your full node. As a reminder, SegWit and Taproot TX include data classified as witness data.

Pardon me, I try to learn but I'm not very technical, but I believe you already knew what I was trying to say, that the dick pics and fart sounds in Ordinals are not embedded in the part of the block where the transactions reside if a user sends Bitcoin. They go to the part where the witness data reside.

Quote

Quote from: Wind_FURY on December 29, 2023, 08:09:47 AM

Quote

It's definitely more concerning, although it's easier to make such TX become non-standard.

Does making them non-standard come with a hard fork?

No, it only requires node operator update their node software which doesn't relay non-standard TX. But miner could include those non-standard TX on their block and deemed valid by other node.

Technically, from the viewpoint of the Bitcoin network with the current consensus rules, are Bitcoin Stamps "non-standard" transactions?