MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CABHetKwan91zqm=0y=_84vG7ffveWTPYONZP_hLQx5o40iAnuQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <Y9PPvBiWOXpBefmD@camus>
In-Reply-To: <Y9PPvBiWOXpBefmD@camus>
From: Robert Dickinson <robert.lee.dickinson@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2023 01:26:15 -0300
Message-ID: <CABHetKxtRMgKC2myYd04UQQ3T2AvVSC7kpN_4_2p4MnHVnANRA@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Ordinal Inscription Size Limits
Precedence: list

On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 10:21 AM Andrew Poelstra
<apoelstra@wpsoftware.net> wrote:

8<

> Unfortunately, as near as I can tell there is no sensible way to prevent
> people from storing arbitrary data in witnesses without incentivizing
> even worse behavior and/or breaking legitimate use cases.

8<

> There's a reasonable argument that this sort of data is toxic to the
> network, since even though "the market is willing to bear" the price of
> scares blockspace, if people were storing NFTs and other crap on the
> chain, then the Bitcoin fee market would become entangled with random
> pump&dump markets, undermining legitimate use cases and potentially
> preventing new technology like LN from gaining a strong foothold. But
> from a technical point of view, I don't see any principled way to stop
> this.
>
>
>
> --
> Andrew Poelstra
> Director of Research, Blockstream
> Email: apoelstra at wpsoftware.net
> Web:   https://www.wpsoftware.net/andrew
>
> The sun is always shining in space
>     -Justin Lewis-Webster
>

Thank you for your reply and explanations. If it be so, then I think
the principled route would be to make it a priority to continuously
educate people on the morals of the matter. Rather than for fads and
scams, the world would be a better place if ordinal inscriptions were
used for enduring, practical, and universally beneficial purposes,
such as for domain name inscription to solve the DNS centralization
problem.