Next scheduled rescrape ... never
Version 1
Last scraped
Scraped on 02/09/2025, 11:52:19 UTC
I hate to repeat this again and again, but Knots does exactly nothing against spam. Please educate yourself, e.g. reading the Bitcoin mailing list discussion.
If Knots was the reference implementation, and nearly all miners would follow their stricter standardness rules, then this would be a massive incentive to store NFTs in fake public keys or addresses. This would pollute the UTXO set and increase the costs for full nodes to validate the blockchain.
See again the prime example Bitcoin Stamps (no link to this service from me, search it yourself).
OP_RETURN and the Taproot "exploit" do not have this problem. And as we're seeing in mid-2025 the big fad is already gone.
One could also say: Everybody advocating for Knots because of the OP_RETURN "problem" is thus a Bitcoin Stamps shill and wants Bitcoin to be less decentralized.
Actually from one side of things, it doesn't even matter if If Knots was the reference implementation, and nearly all miners would follow their stricter standardness rules, then this would be a massive incentive to store NFTs in fake public keys or addresses. This would pollute the UTXO set and increase the costs for full nodes to validate the blockchain.
See again the prime example Bitcoin Stamps (no link to this service from me, search it yourself).
OP_RETURN and the Taproot "exploit" do not have this problem. And as we're seeing in mid-2025 the big fad is already gone.
One could also say: Everybody advocating for Knots because of the OP_RETURN "problem" is thus a Bitcoin Stamps shill and wants Bitcoin to be less decentralized.
The Taproot thing could have been solved, but alas we tend to open more doors than we tend to close for some reason.. I found the arguments against doing so very unconvincing, especially since this is a an "exploit" in a recently introduced feature.
Original archived Re: What is your take on Bitcoin Knotz? Bitcoin node and wallet by Luke Dashjr
Scraped on 02/09/2025, 11:46:56 UTC
I hate to repeat this again and again, but Knots does exactly nothing against spam. Please educate yourself, e.g. reading the Bitcoin mailing list discussion.
If Knots was the reference implementation, and nearly all miners would follow their stricter standardness rules, then this would be a massive incentive to store NFTs in fake public keys or addresses. This would pollute the UTXO set and increase the costs for full nodes to validate the blockchain.
See again the prime example Bitcoin Stamps (no link to this service from me, search it yourself).
OP_RETURN and the Taproot "exploit" do not have this problem. And as we're seeing in mid-2025 the big fad is already gone.
One could also say: Everybody advocating for Knots because of the OP_RETURN "problem" is thus a Bitcoin Stamps shill and wants Bitcoin to be less decentralized.
Actually from one side of things, it doesn't even matter if it works. You can see it more as behavior which signals disagreements with how Core handled this situation. In this case, incentives are useless. The consideration is for malicious entities, they don't care about your incentives. If Knots was the reference implementation, and nearly all miners would follow their stricter standardness rules, then this would be a massive incentive to store NFTs in fake public keys or addresses. This would pollute the UTXO set and increase the costs for full nodes to validate the blockchain.
See again the prime example Bitcoin Stamps (no link to this service from me, search it yourself).
OP_RETURN and the Taproot "exploit" do not have this problem. And as we're seeing in mid-2025 the big fad is already gone.
One could also say: Everybody advocating for Knots because of the OP_RETURN "problem" is thus a Bitcoin Stamps shill and wants Bitcoin to be less decentralized.