Stis

Technology, Bitcoin and Democracy enthusiast.
Thinking deeply about

Tech Law background.
Building #DigitalPolity

Public Key

npub1xq3m9wm4jf68w54drqgryxx7xq4udh0r49zqance7ku7h8vmg07quq37zd

Profile Code

nprofile1qqsrqgajhd6eyarh22k3sypjrr0rq27xmh36j3qweuvltw0tnkd58lqpz3mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduqs6amnwvaz7tmwdaejumr0dskxsfsw

Publishing to

relay.damus.io

nos.lol

Author Public Key

npub1xq3m9wm4jf68w54drqgryxx7xq4udh0r49zqance7ku7h8vmg07quq37zd

Show more details

Last Notes

2025-09-03 15:22:22 UTC

Bitcoin just got another lawyer!
After 4 years, 2 degrees and a year of Bar Practice I am a certified lawyer!
In University, I specialised in Technology Law and Innovation. Now, I am all in professionally into the Bitcoin economy.
By the end of the year, 20 companies more will be accepting Bitcoin as payment and it will be because of me!
Here also me for the first time trying a head stand on a SUP board😄
https://blossom.primal.net/e9c9da251df3923408066c74532259f4ed8d4c469630ca6e521a0e58bff348db.jpg

2025-08-21 20:16:44 UTC

- reply

There is a widget foe this! I'm loving it
https://blossom.primal.net/cfb4e27bd900816c04486df22f2af428e00f7d6abe782566490a79d9c73613f0.jpg

2025-08-13 09:59:40 UTC

Bitcoin is both an unstoppable force and an immovable object.
While the western countries use capital controls in an infallible, selfless, non-arbitrary way that has never once been corrupted and only used for altruistic good; less fortunate people in North African countries, Lebanon, Turkey, China, and countless others are subjugated to arbitrary capital controls that prevent individuals from taking money out solely for the interests of their “leaders.”
At the end of the day, Bitcoin bypassing capital controls isn’t about whether it is good or bad, but whether anyone can actually stop it. The answer is no.
You wouldn’t blame aerodynamics for lifting enemy planes that harm us, so why blame Bitcoin for enabling sovereign capital movement for everyone?
#capitalcontrols #propertyrights #memes #bitcoin #europe #westerncountries #btc #plebchain #primal #damus #amethyst #grownostr #asknostr #democracy
https://blossom.primal.net/dab3f61d15cb1be6b278730aef667534600812f3e4d3db5b3d0a67fc90722198.jpg

2025-08-11 17:08:49 UTC

- reply

I usually start by mentioning that Bitcoin has no central control and is unchangeable. Then I explain that I measure everything - my salary, expenses, houses, rent - in Bitcoin instead of Fiat. That’s when the questions start rolling in.
After speaking with friends I orange-pilled early on, I realized it wasn’t the facts that intrigued them most. It was two things: my passion for Bitcoin and the implied sense that I have intellectual integrity and strong values.
So, the best way to orange-pill someone is simple: speak with passion and be a person of integrity.

2025-08-10 17:35:18 UTC

- reply

#nostrforbaddies

2025-08-10 12:11:16 UTC

If I had a #sat for every time I said #Bitcoin, I'd be a #wholecoiner by now.
#btc #plebchain #primal #grownostr #asknostr
https://blossom.primal.net/3921d1fea9807e328f13a15bc0f98016ed1b3f51135ba537c621923f14603531.jpg

2025-08-10 12:08:06 UTC

- reply

It's all about going all in Bitcoin #financial ly but also professionally. Get a job in a #BitcoinCompany, help friends and family understand Bitcoin's importance, organise events in your local community that talk and educate strangers about it.
Be that Bitcoin guy.
#nevent1q…9qga

2025-08-10 08:44:07 UTC

- reply

What happens when you can't fund war, but your enemy can?👀
Bitcoin stopping wars is not anywhere close. For now it's just showing their real monetary impact. From there, we will just have only the "necessary" or unpreventable battles under the umbrella of the endless Bitcoin Hash War.
#war #mining #bitcoin #europe #us #dollar #btc #plebchain #primal #grownostr #asknostr #hashwars
#nevent1q…zt5h

2025-08-09 23:51:12 UTC

- reply

Looks to me someone has been reading Orwell.
Who owns the tax farm? Who is the villan?

2025-08-09 14:40:52 UTC

- reply

That's about to change my friend🙃

2025-08-08 10:41:37 UTC

When will there be the next Satoshi moment?
What will it be about?
#bitcoin #europe #btc #plebchain #primal #grownostr #asknostr #democracy

2025-08-07 13:42:53 UTC

- reply

Let me bet it all on BLACK
https://blossom.primal.net/1f6eea876ea8b69fc4b4cb4099e3a562cf2a9ca764201fa3beb331c66d2ad6c6.jpg

2025-08-06 12:11:37 UTC

- reply

We need more of these! Awesome⚡

2025-08-04 18:06:04 UTC

Do you want to hop on the trend?
Trade Bitcoin.
Do you want to have money?
Buy Bitcoin.
Do you want to earn money?
Work for Bitcoin.
Do you want to outpace all markets?
Invest in Bitcoin.
Do you want to see the true value of things?
Count in Bitcoin.
Do you want to innovate your business?
Integrate Bitcoin.
Do you want to be part of a natively global market?
Accept Bitcoin.
Do you want to increase your profit margins?
Sell for Bitcoin.
Do you want to shield yourself from inflation?
HODL Bitcoin.
Do you want to secure your wealth?
Store Bitcoin.
Do you want to see your life become cheaper?
Adopt Bitcoin.
Do you want to be independent?
Own Bitcoin.
Do you want to invest in the future?
Stack Bitcoin.
Do you want to be part of a revolution?
Revolt with Bitcoin.
This applies to individuals companies and countries alike!
https://blossom.primal.net/0c601d6907617a63f2aa64db87b244e71639b13a25d69ee3f0a3d2a38331235a.jpg

2025-08-03 21:21:51 UTC

- reply

If liberty is worth more than life, doesn’t it demand greater responsibility? Dying for freedom is noble, but living for it; expanding liberty for others even at your expense where we need to be focusing.
What does fighting for liberty look like for you?

2025-07-31 18:59:33 UTC

Don’t wanna be injecting my opinion in this post, I just want to hear what do you have to say.
Is Bitcoin the peak of materialism or is it the wholy rejection of the concept?
Thoughts?
#asking #askingNOSTR #plebchain

2025-07-21 17:24:23 UTC

#Freedom is something we were born with. Still, freedom can be taken from us or handed over.

2025-07-18 16:21:00 UTC

This has been the third Bitcoin meetup I've organised! There is nothing better than being part of a grass root movement you believe in!!
We talked about Real Estate and Bitcoin. Great people, fun times!
Till the next one!!!
@nprofile…sfc8 #realestate #Bitcoin #sovereignty
https://blossom.primal.net/f1cadd2447cff8dcbe35aac0145a0231b83623574bc5069ff4d3359e5d812ec3.jpg
https://blossom.primal.net/5deb5949602019a71548814530919822d207c2b9f30e8a68f24bf9225cef1bff.jpg
https://blossom.primal.net/6063eaf2922ab04abb53c3e6e619cba221575e932269433bbd38e1f6b1bd244a.jpg
https://blossom.primal.net/e76567b9c2e08e871123c8b114563a22a075ca5c794d0e59f9613de561c9ef71.jpg
https://blossom.primal.net/6291f81155a5714e3d95c425b71dadd0e3fdd2c72faa8116fd3c91d2514fce0f.jpg

2025-06-02 18:34:09 UTC

- reply

Centralisation isn’t inherently bad. History has always been a dance between centralisation and decentralisation—that’s just how it works.
The leading civilisations of every era have usually managed to offer more freedom than their rivals while still maintaining enough control to get things done competitively. That balance is what lets them harness the energy of their people, turning it into something much bigger, like winning trade wars or wars. Think of ancient Athens, the Roman Empire, or the United States. At their peak, they struck that sweet spot: enough freedom to spark innovation and loyalty, but enough control to organise society and achieve massive outputs.
But here’s the problem—they all eventually lose that balance. Over time, centralisation stops being precise and starts becoming arbitrary. Corruption creeps in, and the freedom and decentralisation that made them strong in the first place erodes.
Athens fell apart because of internal conflict—the Peloponnesian War and the rise of oligarchies tore it down. Rome shifted from a republic to an empire, drowning in autocracy and corruption while its citizens lost their freedoms. And now, the U.S. is heading down a similar path, with growing federal centralisation, inefficiency, and corruption threatening the decentralised foundations that made it successful.
The real winners have always been societies that find a way to balance decentralised governance and personal freedom, while being led by an intellectual ruling class that the people actually trust and obey.
That’s the formula that works.
#Innovation #Freedom #Democracy #Corruption
#Nostr #Decentralization #Bitcoin #OpenProtocols #CensorshipResistance #NostrNetwork #plebchain
#nevent1q…30vw

2025-05-30 17:30:52 UTC

Constraints Drive Innovation—And That’s Why Bitcoin Thrives
Limits spark creativity. It’s a simple truth: when we’re forced to work within constraints, we innovate. Bitcoin’s design is built on this principle, and it’s what keeps the network secure, decentralized, and constantly evolving.
Take *block size*, for example. The limited space in each block pushes developers to find smarter solutions, like SegWit and the Lightning Network, to make transactions more efficient. Without this constraint, we wouldn’t have the same drive to optimize, and Bitcoin would be bloated and less decentralized.
Or look at *OP_RETURN*, which allows us to embed data in transactions. The limited space forces us to get creative, encoding metadata compactly to enable things like NFTs and timestamping without overwhelming the blockchain. If there were no limits, the network would be flooded with unnecessary data, making it harder for people to run nodes and keep Bitcoin decentralized.
And then there’s *mining difficulty*. The constant adjustment ensures blocks are found every 10 minutes, no matter how much hashing power is in play. This competition pushes miners to innovate with better hardware and energy solutions, keeping the network secure and decentralized. Without this constraint, mining would stagnate, and the network would be weaker for it.
And let’s not forget Bitcoin’s ultimate constraint: *its fixed supply of 21 million coins*. This hard cap is the foundation of its value. Unlike fiat currencies that can be printed endlessly, Bitcoin’s scarcity forces us to rethink how we store and transfer wealth. It drives innovation in how we use money—whether it’s through layer-2 solutions like Lightning, or new financial tools built on Bitcoin. The fixed supply also incentivizes long-term thinking and saving, creating a system where value grows over time instead of being eroded by inflation. Without this constraint, Bitcoin would just be another currency, not the revolutionary form of money it is today.
Bitcoin’s constraints aren’t flaws—they’re features. They force us to think smarter, build better, and innovate constantly. That’s why Bitcoin continues to thrive.
If you believe in the power of innovation through limits, share this and let’s keep the conversation going. Bitcoin’s future depends on people who understand why its design matters.
Any tother constraints Bitcoin has that I missed?
If you find this post helpful, please repost and interact with it. I am taking this nostr social media seriously and I'd like some feedback!
#Bitcoin #21Million #ProofOfWork #DecentralizedMoney #plebchain #BitcoinInnovation #SoundMoney #Nostr #BitcoinCommunity #vegas
https://blossom.primal.net/0981ce713d5a934f22fc99f3d3072db10f987e0c2dca8e8cb87f71b023490274.jpg

2025-05-28 18:26:15 UTC

When you think about Bitcoin as the foundation of the monetary system, it’s really about the start of a new, emerging global system of governance and government.
Do you understand?
#nostr #plebchain #privacy #Bitcoin #globalgov #digitalpolity #softwar

2025-05-25 20:29:37 UTC

Instagram qnd other centralised soxial media platforms, don’t just track surface-level interactions like likes or comments. Through their patented technologies, they construct a detailed behavioral profile by analyzing every aspect of your activity—what you watch, how long you watch, what you skip, and who you engage with. They even track the themes or visual styles that capture your attention. This results in a digital representation of you, designed to predict and serve content that keeps you engaged, creating an echo chamber tailored to your habits. You’re not merely scrolling; you’re being observed and influenced.
Nostr, on the other hand, offers a fundamentally different approach to social media. Built on a decentralized protocol, it eliminates algorithms, behavioral tracking, and echo chambers. Instead, it empowers users with full control over their data and content.
While individual clients on Nostr could introduce algorithms, the decentralized nature ensures you’re free to choose alternatives without interference or manipulation.
It’s a platform where your digital experience is determined by you, not by hidden systems or middlemen.
#InstagramAlgorithm #AI #EchoChamber #Decentralization #SocialMedia #Nostr

2025-05-22 07:13:57 UTC

- reply

Fiat's demise always over joys me!
Arbitrary number go-ups celebrations are for normies

2025-05-21 17:43:22 UTC

- reply

Governments are the greatest marketers for Bitcoin.
nevent1qqszazd7ccv2ge4skphsp90jw7qfzy8hf6p6dwrytj5dvh78se5gkxgpramhxue69uhkummnw3ezuetfde6kuer6wasku7nfvuh8xurpvdjs6zraf7

2025-05-21 10:46:03 UTC

- reply

Not enough for your demeaning question

2025-05-21 09:23:26 UTC

- reply

No such thing as an anonymous Internet user, it's just marketing.
There is only high and low levels pseudonymity.

2025-05-21 08:17:50 UTC

Bitcoin is all about #grass root adoption and initiatives. I am glad to have contributed to that through organising a local #Bitcoin #meetup in Limassol.
Made a presentation named "Why Bitcoin" where I shared my views as to how Bitcoin benefits th Environment, the Economy, Society and as a conclusion the Individual.
Can't wait for the next one!⚡
#plebchain #events #education
https://blossom.primal.net/a73cfbf755aa26ba1129ed793f7432c1476f3ae44bd5ba1fd8129910600d39c6.jpg
https://blossom.primal.net/9e47afdff244c4726162cce3a2caf7f808a977f717123591d30f0f61b7a9d166.jpg

2025-05-19 20:11:41 UTC

- reply

Can't argue with that👨‍⚖

2025-05-19 13:59:43 UTC

- reply

Zapping ≠ satting, might bw confusing.
The first mover advantage sats have make it better for sure. Other than that, oshis seem more practical imo.

2025-05-19 13:46:09 UTC

- reply

"Oshis" are better.
Example: I am oshing, I oshied you
Being able to use it as a verb is a massive plus!

2025-05-19 13:30:24 UTC

Hear me out, I've been a supporter of sats and on top of liking it, I've gotten used to it.
With an open mind, I propose we instead of Sats, we use "Oshis" (Oshi).
With calling Bitcoin denominations oshis, we can use it as a verb (for example: oshi me, I oshied you)
In Japanese it also means "push" or "press" which is fitting imo.
Interact with this post and let me know your thoughts! ⚡

2025-05-15 17:05:01 UTC

- reply

alright, fair
still want me to tey out the app?

2025-05-14 18:13:27 UTC

- reply

Apps are built on protocols. Your app would fit perfectly for nostr, wouldn't it?.
Genuine question, can you build the 🟧💊 app as a nostr client?

2025-05-14 05:28:19 UTC

- reply

To be honest, I am just looking for hypocrisy😅
I guess the company wants to maintain centralised control over its own IP

2025-05-13 20:30:27 UTC

@npub1ve8…9ka6 Is your app build on nostr tho??

2025-05-12 20:17:31 UTC

- reply

although i want to agree with you, I'll refrain from doing so as to prevent an echo chamber from occurring
So, no.

2025-05-12 07:07:05 UTC

- reply

Expanding Bitcoin's Layer 1 uses beyond a peer-to-peer cash system undermines its security and risks transforming it into a less valuable asset.
Such proposals are either based on genuine maliciousness or driven by greed with no bad intentions.
Spam is anything other than the data required for Bitcoin to function as a peer-to-peer cash system.

2025-05-12 06:08:13 UTC

- reply

what is the timeline for this project?

2025-05-12 06:05:54 UTC

- reply

yeah, because anything unser $10T makes sense🙄

2025-05-12 05:59:02 UTC

- reply

I'd have to check out nostr's algorithm for content recommendation (if it even exists). Problem is I don't even know where to look😅
But most probably yes it is, at least partially.

2025-05-11 09:06:31 UTC

- reply

me trying out lightning wallets
https://m.primal.net/QuMu.jpg

2025-05-11 09:01:52 UTC

- reply

since I have to choose an echo chamber, might as well go with the Bitcoin one
smartest group of people alive

2025-05-09 10:51:59 UTC

- reply

this is so they have some upside to go when BTC has it's leg up to 200k and then claim ETH outperformed BTC on the weekly 😂
and the illusion continues...

2025-05-09 05:54:55 UTC

Attended a DLT meetup yesterday. My favourite thing to do at these events is to go around and try to #orangepill people
Safe to say I was the odd one out.
https://m.primal.net/Qrnb.jpg
https://m.primal.net/Qrng.jpg

2025-05-07 14:29:40 UTC

Breaking: You can now pay directly with your crypto on Revolut Visa
#Revolut is using horses to pull cars
They gradually introduce their costumers to crypto through intermediary steps...
Would you use this?
https://m.primal.net/Qpxh.jpg

2025-05-07 14:24:14 UTC

The Bitcoin Core OP_RETURN debate and the Blocksize Wars (2015–2017) share notable similarities, reflecting ongoing tensions within the Bitcoin community regarding its purpose, scalability, and governance. Let's go into a deep dive to understand their similarities but also where they differ!!
Drop a reaction if you you found this post helpful 💯🙏
Both highlight the struggle to balance Bitcoin's foundational principles—decentralization and financial sovereignty—with evolving demands.
1. Core Issue: Scaling vs. Purpose
- Blocksize Wars: Focused on scaling Bitcoin to handle increased transaction volumes. "Big blockers" sought larger block sizes to enhance throughput, while "small blockers" worried this would jeopardize decentralization, favoring off-chain solutions like the Lightning Network.
- OP_RETURN Debate: Centers on handling non-financial data. The NACK side argues for limiting OP_RETURN to preserve Bitcoin's monetary role, while the ACK side advocates for flexibility to accommodate broader use cases.
- Similarity: Both debates contrast a purist view (Bitcoin as money) with a pragmatist view (adapting to new demands), questioning whether Bitcoin should evolve or maintain its original constraints.
2. Spam and Efficiency Concerns
- Blocksize Wars: Small blockers feared larger blocks would increase resource demands, risking centralization and spam from low-value transactions.
- OP_RETURN Debate: NACK proponents worry that removing OP_RETURN limits would lead to spam from non-monetary data, complicating network efficiency.
- Similarity: Both discussions emphasize the risk of spam overwhelming the network, stressing the need for a lean and efficient blockchain.
3. Philosophical Divide: Bitcoin’s Purpose
- Blocksize Wars: Sparked a philosophical debate over Bitcoin's identity—payment system vs. store of value.
- OP_RETURN Debate: Reflects a similar divide, with the NACK side prioritizing Bitcoin as a monetary system and the ACK side accepting data storage as inevitable.
- Similarity: Both conflicts reveal a rift between those advocating for a rigid purpose and those supporting evolution to meet diverse needs.
4. Governance and Community Division
- Blocksize Wars: Exposed governance challenges within Bitcoin's decentralized structure, leading to forks like Bitcoin Cash.
- OP_RETURN Debate: Highlights similar governance tensions, with Bitcoin Core developers influencing outcomes amid community division.
- Similarity: Both debates illustrate the difficulties in decision-making within a decentralized system, resulting in fragmentation and prolonged discussions.
5. Inevitability of Use Cases vs. Resistance to Change
- Blocksize Wars: Big blockers argued for on-chain scaling to address high fees, while small blockers resisted immediate changes.
- OP_RETURN Debate: ACK proponents see data storage as inevitable, while NACK supporters resist changes that could compromise Bitcoin's core principles.
- Similarity: Both debates highlight the tension between adapting to user behavior and maintaining original design constraints.
6. Historical Precedents and Long-Term Impacts
- Blocksize Wars: Resulted in SegWit adoption and the emergence of Bitcoin Cash, influencing ongoing scalability debates.
- OP_RETURN Debate: Draws on past concerns about spam, with potential outcomes impacting future data-heavy applications.
- Similarity: Both conflicts serve as pivotal moments that challenge the Bitcoin community to confront technical and philosophical limits, shaping future developments.
The key takeaway is that the OP_RETURN debate and the Blocksize Wars illustrate a clash between Bitcoin's foundational vision and the pressures of evolving demands. Both reflect deep philosophical divides, governance challenges, and the struggle to balance efficiency with inclusivity in a decentralized network. The outcomes of these debates could significantly influence Bitcoin's trajectory, whether by accommodating new use cases or reaffirming its financial-first ethos.
Who.do you think will win?

2025-05-07 09:55:16 UTC

It's about time we get group chats on nostr. Any clients that offer this already?

2025-05-07 09:34:23 UTC

- reply

communication through memes🤌

2025-05-07 09:32:24 UTC

- reply

some principles must be set to be timeless. There is a place for mob rule

2025-05-07 09:25:01 UTC

- reply

then Muun ia not a lightning wallet but just a LN account?👀

2025-05-07 08:50:15 UTC

- reply

What are the criteria for a #lighting network wallet according to normies?

2025-05-07 08:36:36 UTC

The debate surrounding the Bitcoin Core Pull Request (PR) to remove size limits on OP_RETURN, centers on how Bitcoin should balance its role as a financial system versus a platform for storing arbitrary data.
OP_RETURN is a Bitcoin script opcode that allows small amounts of data (currently capped at 80 bytes) to be embedded in transactions, often used for things like timestamps, notes, or metadata for sidechains and bridges. The proposal to lift this limit has sparked a heated discussion, with two distinct sides emerging: those against the change (Concept NACK) and those in favor (Concept ACK). Let’s break down their arguments in detail.
🔴 Side Against Removing Limits (Concept NACK)
This group opposes the proposal to remove OP_RETURN size limits, arguing that it undermines Bitcoin’s core purpose and introduces significant risks to the network’s efficiency and integrity. Here are their main points:
1. Increased Spam and Non-Monetary Use:
- Critics like Seccour, chrisguida, and wizkid057 (as cited in the thread) argue that removing OP_RETURN limits would invite more spam and non-financial data onto the blockchain. They see Bitcoin primarily as a monetary system, not a general-purpose data storage platform. For example, chrisguida warns that this change could turn Bitcoin into a “self-fulfilling prophecy” where it becomes a dumping ground for non-monetary data, similar to what some critics argue has happened with Ethereum.
- Historical precedent supports their concern: during the 2014 OP_RETURN Wars (mentioned in web ID 0 and web ID 3), projects like Veriblock used OP_RETURN to embed large amounts of data, leading developers to reduce the limit from 80 bytes to 40 bytes to curb spam before later raising it back to 80 bytes.
2. Crowding Out Financial Transactions:
- Opponents argue that allowing larger OP_RETURN data could clog the blockchain, increasing competition for block space and potentially crowding out legitimate financial transactions. Wizkid057 emphasizes that Bitcoin’s design prioritizes monetary use, and loosening limits could lead to “inevitable” abuse, where the blockchain becomes a “cheap place for people to dump their garbage forever.”
3. Impact on Network Efficiency:
- More data in transactions increases the burden on nodes, which have to store and relay this information indefinitely. Critics highlight that this could exacerbate issues like mempool congestion, where the pool of unconfirmed transactions grows, slowing down the network. Web ID 2 notes past congestion events, like in May 2023, when Ordinals and Inscriptions (which also embed data in transactions) caused Binance to suspend Bitcoin withdrawals due to network strain.
4. Preserving Node Sovereignty:
- The current limits allow node operators to configure settings like `-datacarrier` and `-datacarriersize`, giving them control over what data their nodes relay. Seccour argues that removing these limits takes away this sovereignty, forcing nodes to accept larger data payloads and reducing their ability to filter out spam. This is seen as a step toward centralization, as smaller nodes with limited resources might struggle to keep up.
5. Philosophical Concerns:
- Critics like Luke Dashjr (mentioned in web ID 2) call the proposal “utter insanity,” arguing that it accelerates the degradation of Bitcoin’s financial-first purpose. They fear Bitcoin could devolve into a “worthless altcoin” (web ID 0) if it prioritizes non-monetary use cases over its role as a sovereign monetary protocol.
🟢 Side For Removing Limits (Concept ACK)
Supporters of the proposal, including developers like Pieter Wuille, Sjors Provoost (web ID 2), murchandamus, and eragmus (from the thread), argue that removing OP_RETURN limits is a pragmatic and less harmful way to accommodate inevitable data storage on Bitcoin. Their key arguments are:
1. Data Storage is Inevitable:
- Proponents like eragmus argue that people will store data on Bitcoin regardless of restrictions, often using more harmful methods like embedding data in Taproot transactions (e.g., Ordinals and Inscriptions) or through private deals with miners. These alternatives can bloat the UTXO set (unspent transaction outputs), which slows down the network, as noted in web ID 2. OP_RETURN, by contrast, is provably unspendable, meaning it doesn’t contribute to UTXO bloat, making it a cleaner option.
2. Reducing Harmful Workarounds:
- Murchandamus points out that strict OP_RETURN limits push users to worse alternatives, like embedding data in ways that increase node traffic or encourage miner centralization (e.g., by negotiating directly with miners to include data). Relaxing the limits could guide data usage toward OP_RETURN, which is transparent and less disruptive. Web ID 2 highlights that this could also reduce mempool fragmentation, where the pool of unconfirmed transactions becomes inefficient due to cluttered data.
3. Encouraging Network Usage:
- Supporters like Karbon (web ID 0) argue that allowing more data via OP_RETURN can benefit the network by supporting applications like sidechains and bridges, which drive more transactions and increase Bitcoin’s utility. This aligns with a free-market perspective, where increased usage could lead to higher fees, potentially pricing out low-value data over time.
4. Aligning with Reality:
- Eragmus calls the change a “common-sense” adjustment, noting that Bitcoin Core’s restrictive stance on OP_RETURN doesn’t stop data embedding—it just pushes it into less desirable forms. They argue that by acknowledging and accommodating this reality, Bitcoin Core can better manage how data interacts with the blockchain, rather than fighting a losing battle against it.
5. Philosophical Support for Flexibility:
- Proponents believe Bitcoin should evolve to meet user demands while maintaining its core principles. They argue that OP_RETURN, being a small and unspendable part of a transaction, is a minimal concession that doesn’t fundamentally alter Bitcoin’s monetary focus. Murchandamus even suggests that larger OP_RETURNs could reduce mining centralization by decreasing the incentive for miners to prioritize private data deals over standard transactions.
Broader Context and Implications
The debate reflects a deeper tension in Bitcoin’s community between “purists,” who want to keep Bitcoin focused on its monetary purpose, and “pragmatists,” who see value in adapting to new use cases. Historical events like the 2014 OP_RETURN Wars (web ID 0, web ID 3) and the rise of Ordinals in 2023 (web ID 2) show that this isn’t a new issue—Bitcoin has long grappled with how to handle non-financial data. The NACK side prioritizes efficiency, sovereignty, and Bitcoin’s original vision, while the ACK side emphasizes pragmatism, harm reduction, and network growth.
Would you NACK or ACK this? The response from BillyBoone32 leans toward ossification (doing nothing), suggesting that market forces—like rising fees from economically valuable transactions—could naturally price out spam over time. This middle-ground view highlights the complexity of the issue, as both sides present compelling arguments rooted in Bitcoin’s technical and philosophical foundations.
Let me know if you found this post helpful!⚡
Thank you for reading!
https://m.primal.net/QplB.jpg

2025-05-06 10:24:22 UTC

Another #Bitcoin meetup has been concluded!
It was great having the opportunity to talk with all these great minds!
The #Cyprus Bitcoin Community is only going up from here on!
https://m.primal.net/Qogt.jpg

2025-04-14 14:38:02 UTC

- reply

very intriguing title to say the least
are you building on the idea of bitcoin or just applying the idea of a “rigit constitution” to a constitution that is safeguarded by BitPower?

2025-04-14 10:55:48 UTC

- reply

nosrtards be getting more and more

2025-04-14 10:54:57 UTC

- reply

when they can control you having them

2025-04-12 21:25:42 UTC

Is it me or do videos lag way to much on Nostr? (Primal client)

2025-04-11 22:23:25 UTC

- reply

WE are the captain now

2025-04-05 08:10:42 UTC

Can’t have a bad day when your wealth is secured by a cyberdome of BitPower
#softwar #sunnydays
#firstpost
https://m.primal.net/QEts.mov