@BitcoinKernel
Bitcoin Kernel
6 days
📜 Thread: Antoine Poinsot on the OP_RETURN Policy Debate (based on @darosior statements on May 20, 2025) 👇
1
2
6

Replies

@BitcoinKernel
Bitcoin Kernel
6 days
1/ Antoine Poinsot (@darosior), Bitcoin Core contributor, shared several clear points on the OP_RETURN policy change and the broader debate around “data on Bitcoin.” Here are the key takeaways 👇
1
0
0
@BitcoinKernel
Bitcoin Kernel
6 days
2/ This is not a consensus change. Any OP_RETURN size has always been valid at the consensus layer. The update only affects relay policy (standardness). Nodes that dislike it can simply keep the old policy.
1
0
0
@BitcoinKernel
Bitcoin Kernel
6 days
3/ This has almost nothing to do with inscriptions or JPEGs. ~99% of inscriptions store data inside witness, not OP_RETURN. Relaxing OP_RETURN limits does not make inscriptions cheaper or easier.
1
0
1
@BitcoinKernel
Bitcoin Kernel
6 days
4/ The real beneficiaries are Layer 2 protocols. Lightning and other state channels occasionally need to publish small pieces of proof data (tens to hundreds of bytes). Because OP_RETURN was too small, they had to use “fake pubkeys,” which permanently bloat the UTXO set.
1
0
1
@BitcoinKernel
Bitcoin Kernel
6 days
5/ History shows policy filters don’t stop economically driven usage. 2014: OP_RETURN restricted → people used multisig hacks 2023–24: inscriptions restricted → they used witness + private relays (Slipstream) Filters only push traffic from the public network to private bridge
1
0
0
@BitcoinKernel
Bitcoin Kernel
6 days
6/ Filters are not firewalls. If someone wants something mined and pays high fees, miners will include it. Policy rules mostly inconvenience everyday users but can’t block determined use cases
1
0
0
@BitcoinKernel
Bitcoin Kernel
6 days
7/ Relaxing the limit reduces long-term damage. Better to move data into pruneable OP_RETURN than continue stuffing it into UTXO-bloating fake pubkeys. Cleaner for nodes, better for long-term health.
1
0
0
@BitcoinKernel
Bitcoin Kernel
6 days
8/ “Your node, your rules.” Don’t like it? Don’t upgrade. Or apply your own patch and keep the old limit. Bitcoin remains opt-in.
1
0
0
@BitcoinKernel
Bitcoin Kernel
6 days
9/ This is not “giving in” or being “captured.” It’s a straightforward engineering tradeoff: Provide a safe, minimal-harm path for real protocol needs instead of forcing them to use worse methods that hurt the network.
1
0
0
@BitcoinKernel
Bitcoin Kernel
6 days
10/ Summary: Consensus unchanged Inscriptions unaffected L2 gets a cleaner, safer data channel UTXO bloat decreases Filters can’t block economic use Node sovereignty preserved
1
0
0
@BitcoinKernel
Bitcoin Kernel
6 days
11/ The core message from Antoine: “If people are going to do it anyway, give them the least harmful, pruneable path instead of pushing them toward UTXO pollution.” 🧵 End. Follow @BitcoinKernel for real-time Bitcoin dev updates
0
0
0
@aVeryGoodTyrone
TyroneT
3 days
Possible rebrand -- Transgender Day of Appropriation. If this day were about truth, it would acknowledge that the "disproportionate number of victims counted as transgender are gender-nonconforming gay and bisexual males trapped in violent street economies...[it] might also
5
19
117