Quote from: pooya87 on May 06, 2024, 02:54:37 PM

At this point I think the only remaining hope is for some third party creating a side-chain to create this garbage there and then pump it so that the gamblers actually bother going there. That way we can "transfer the cancer" out of Bitcoin and let it die there instead of it metastasizing here.
The "pumping" part is important...

In that case, we should encourage Blockstream to massively promote their Liquid network. After all, the feature is already exist.

Quote from: larry_vw_1955 on Today at 01:54:03 AM

Quote from: LoyceV on May 05, 2024, 06:07:54 AM

To me, this was acceptable until it reached thousands of OP_RETURN transactions per block. See Mempool Goggles. The larger spam transactions are now replaced by many more small transactions. It's still spam and takes up block space that could have been used by real Bitcoin users.

you can't have it both ways. you either accept and support OP_RETURN and allowing people to store data on the blockchain or you say "No, I don't agree with OP_RETURN at all. Bitcoin was not meant for people to think of as any type of data storage." period the end.

Why not? People opinion isn't limited to yes or no. That's why Likert scale (strongly disagree to strongly agree or 1 to 5) exist.

Quote from: larry_vw_1955 on Today at 01:54:03 AM

the logic that you are going to introduce a special op code to store data so they won't abuse UTXOs is ridiculous in my opinion. but that's what we did and that's where we are. the end results of that...

The other choice is letting total UTXO explode, which leads to higher RAM requirement or faster disk speed to run full node.