Quote from: BayAreaCoins on May 10, 2025, 11:17:04 PM

Quote from: ABCbits on May 10, 2025, 10:58:56 AM

Quote from: BayAreaCoins on May 10, 2025, 05:05:06 AM

Could the removal of OP_RETURN be applied to Testnet first and then see how "bad" people can fuck it up there first?

As i stated on earlier page, it just mean people will switch to OP_FALSE OP_IF ... OP_ENDIF inside witness script (this is what Ordinal does). You'll see bloated blockchain since Ordinal need to create 2 on-chain TX to do an operation and spike on UTXO growth if people use it to create token/NFT where the owner representation using an address/UTXO with small amount of Bitcoin.

Should we see this "bloat" on Bitcoin Testnet 4 right now? I've sent some coins over to try it out hands-on: https://mempool.space/testnet4/tx/f6de3d16e35e3e1e041d50495cd566192d7f9e8977a3f43c5a347e39b5b3a76b

Edit: I think I see it, thanks.

What exactly are you trying to say? After all, currently you can create Ordinal TX on testnet4.

Quote from: tvbcof on May 11, 2025, 07:49:10 AM

For various of the on-chain transactions I perform, I would prefer they be processed by non-commercial mining operations (especially in light of the above.) Assuming some sort of a trustworthy coordination platform, would it be practical to pay minimal or no fee, but instead pay a relatively large sum to an address which would be distributed to the kind of miners which I prefer (e.g., people running bitaxe like devices in their homes and coordinating with processor)? Are such efforts underway or functional?

I don't think such thing is possible, unless you only share your TX with those non-commercial miners and wait for them to mine a block and include your TX manually. There's also limitation regarding those miner joining mining pool, where AFAIK most of them owned by for-profit company.

Quote from: MeGold666 on Today at 09:41:57 AM

This would need to be fixed at the protocol level to make it impossible - and we all know nothing will be done.
From what I've read on GitHub, there is a solution for it, but people argue it shouldn't be implemented, and every discussion on the topic is eventually closed.

Can you share discussion link which makes it impossible, including misuse of address and public key to store arbitrary data?