MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAK=nyAxOa8fsVfxucH7WTTMn25BCzgQ28h_sNsunedpCoRXjjQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABE6yHscUPAcyK58DvqhOnxSOoPMBAy9aMUmReJYSkBit-Mekg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPv7Tja=4ZFm5+gHw+wMcZyPEqeQiVx-AjyXsRn0T8a+tXHb1A@mail.gmail.com>
 <050674b8bc51cff11e0a6e105880b647@cock.li>
In-Reply-To: <050674b8bc51cff11e0a6e105880b647@cock.li>
From: Zach Greenwood <zachgrw@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2021 10:45:31 +0200
Message-ID: <CAJ4-pEDEsQCqT9Yiz6WiWahPV5kkxc89XbsDydgEPuoZRU8MvQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: yanmaani@cock.li, 
 Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000afa21005c0637864"
Cc: christopher.gilliard@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP - limiting OP_RETURN / HF
Precedence: list

--000000000000afa21005c0637864
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

[Note: this is my first post to the list]

Businesses storing data on-chain is undesirable but sadly unavoidable.
Therefore one might as well *facilitate* data storage beyond just OP_RETURN
by offering a more efficient way to store data on-chain, while still being
almost as expensive in use per byte of payload (i.e., data) compared to
using OP_RETURN.

Storing data using OP_RETURN is still inefficient per byte of payload so a
more efficient dedicated data storing facility might be created that stores
more payload data per on-chain byte. Such a facility should be (marginally)
cheaper to use per payload byte compared to using a hack such as OP_RETURN.
This would encourage the use of this facility in favor of OP_RETURN or
other hacks, while at the same time dramatically reducing the footprint of
storing data on-chain.

Zac

On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 4:29 AM yanmaani--- via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> > If only one hash is allowed per block, then those who wish to utilize
> > the hash will have to out-bid each other ("fee-bidding"). This hash can
> > then be used to create another chain ("merged-mining")
>
> Merged mining at present only needs one hash for a merkle root, and
> that's stored in the coinbase. It would be even simpler to add the
> following rules:
>
> 1) No OP_RETURN transactions allowed at all
> 2) If you want to commit data, do so in that one transaction in the
> coinbase
>
> Also curious about how you'd handle the payment - do I need to put in a
> transaction that burns bitcoins for the tx fee? That isn't free in terms
> of storage either.
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>

--000000000000afa21005c0637864
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">[Note: this is my first post to the list]<div><br></div><d=
iv>Businesses storing data on-chain is undesirable but sadly unavoidable. T=
herefore one might as well *facilitate* data storage beyond just OP_RETURN =
by offering a more efficient way to store data on-chain, while still being =
almost as expensive in use per byte of payload (i.e., data) compared to usi=
ng OP_RETURN.</div><div><br></div><div>Storing data using OP_RETURN is stil=
l inefficient per byte of payload so a more efficient dedicated data storin=
g facility might be created that stores more payload data per on-chain byte=
. Such a facility should be (marginally) cheaper to use per payload byte co=
mpared to using a hack such as OP_RETURN. This would encourage the use of t=
his facility in favor of OP_RETURN or other hacks, while at the same time d=
ramatically reducing the footprint of storing data on-chain.</div><div><br>=
</div><div>Zac</div></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" c=
lass=3D"gmail_attr">On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 4:29 AM yanmaani--- via bitcoin=
-dev &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-d=
ev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"g=
mail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204=
,204,204);padding-left:1ex">&gt; If only one hash is allowed per block, the=
n those who wish to utilize <br>
&gt; the hash will have to out-bid each other (&quot;fee-bidding&quot;). Th=
is hash can <br>
&gt; then be used to create another chain (&quot;merged-mining&quot;)<br>
<br>
Merged mining at present only needs one hash for a merkle root, and <br>
that&#39;s stored in the coinbase. It would be even simpler to add the <br>
following rules:<br>
<br>
1) No OP_RETURN transactions allowed at all<br>
2) If you want to commit data, do so in that one transaction in the <br>
coinbase<br>
<br>
Also curious about how you&#39;d handle the payment - do I need to put in a=
 <br>
transaction that burns bitcoins for the tx fee? That isn&#39;t free in term=
s <br>
of storage either.<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">=
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mail=
man/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br>
</blockquote></div>

--000000000000afa21005c0637864--