OP

8A8

Its a really odd hill to die on Either a) it is admitting we need to conserve on-chain space for transactions, which is an odd argument to make as small-blockers or b) we admit it's okay to use arbitrary data on chain (which we already do with smaller OP\_RETURNS), and if so, why impose random limits on it? All data should be treated equal, financial or otherwise. I've used OP\_RETURN before, for proof-of-existence messaging, or data in general. In the future, it can be an easy way to keep secondary assets on chain, like certificates, deeds, or layer-2 settlements. The ability for transactions to be so easily made on layer 1 is probably the single biggest reason that big advancements in layer 2 technology and adoption haven't been made. It won't happen unless it happens out of necessity.

harvested

I don't think this is pessimism, rather, just so obvious it doesn't need to be pointed out? OP is saying that value in todays dollars will achieve gold parity.

mokahless

>for some reason... If you "save" in Bitcoin, then you are treating Bitcoin as savings. This is not smart as Bitcoin - even if it always go up long-term - is a volatile asset. Therefore, like what happened to OP, when an emergency occurs, if your "savings" are in Bitcoin, and Bitcoin happens to be down, you're fucked. The "some reason" that I brought this up is that liquid savings in an emergency fund are for this. If you are... >Maybe most people don't have enough? ...someone who doesn't have enough money to keep separate, liquid cash, then you should not be investing in volatile assets because one little bad event in your personal life requiring funds occurring while your only "savings" which are in a volatile asset just so happen to be down has a multiplicative negative effect on your long-term retirement or whatever else you want to invest for in the future. Of course, if you are poor enough that taking this risk is worth the reward because you have nothing to lose either way, fine. But really, most people who think they are in that situation are just not planning their finances and budgeting well enough. If you can scrape together enough to invest in Bitcoin, you can split that amount between liquid savings you don't touch and Bitcoin or whatever other long-term investment you want.

jonnytitanx

I guess what I was thinking is if you shift the reference point ie. the starting point to the left or right by a bit, the whole graph falls apart. It kinda seems to be a cherry-picked point in time that forces it to fit the desired results and narrative. And people do that with a lot of things in this space. So don't just trust it blindly. Test it for yourself. But I can't deny it kinda seems eerily predictable based on this set of data points. With that all said, it also seems like OP also explained the theory of diminishing returns. Point is, take everything you read and hear with a grain of salt. Question all. Be sceptical. Confirm with your own research. Most people will not do this part when investing.

MrRGnome

I'd support removing the default datacarriersize limit, but not the datacarrier options being removed entirely. If I want to ignore OP_RETURNs on a given node that's my business.

arthurwolf

There's actually a pretty obvious pattern with bitcoin, that has stayed consistent for a long while... If you take price as a log scale, and time as a log scale, you pretty much got a straight line (**especially** if you map the lows/minima of the price graph). (OP's graph is essentially a convoluted way of showing this...) And it's been a straight line for a good decade, so it's in fact not changing... Not making this up, just asked chatgpt to generate the graph: https://imgur.com/a/WFYWFO4 And the pattern makes sense, with the halvings and the increased adoption. There's **zero** guarantee it'll continue in the future, but so far it's been pretty consistent.

arthurwolf

Continuing OP's graph, around the end of this century, BTC would be doing less than equities (double every 8 years)

0x456

OP banned there most probably. They ban anyone they want and therefore all they have is this negativity echo chamber.

NdalaCorp

if btc goes to 200k right now, OP will only double his money. And it’s extremely unlikely that will happen within next year compared to the all too likely drop that has happened every cycle. You really think it can go up in a straight line forever? Whereas altseason hasn’t started yet and 5/10x even higher on major alts are extremely likely. I own btc, and I love btc, all I said was it’s dumb buying it right now when there is much better opportunities. It sounds to me like you’re the one that needs to wake up from dream world good sir.

PeterRegarrdo

This.....is actually a good point lol. Although I'm gonna be shocked if OP can find someone to give him an unsecured 50k loan. If was able to secure it I don't think he'd be here asking this question.

No_Cow_8702

The answer is yes, OP.

stefansilva_xrp

OP you have been scammed by Changelly. They are a scam company headed by British Citizen living in Hong Kong named Jake Barry Frederick Cormack. He is using SVG legal systems as a way to steal money. He has scammed me too. His twitter is Jake\_Arb

soulaDev

TL;DR – Is Bitcoin Core Going Rogue? Matt Kratter dives into a growing controversy in the Bitcoin community involving the OP_RETURN field, which allows data to be embedded in the blockchain. Some Bitcoin Core devs are being criticized for trying to limit its use, sparking concerns about censorship and creeping centralization. A key focus is the Citrea project, which uses OP_RETURN in a way that some devs find problematic. But the bigger red flag for many was the banning of the pseudonymous developer mechanic, who had been vocal in challenging Core devs. This move has raised alarms about whether dissent is being silenced within the ecosystem. Kratter warns that Bitcoin’s decentralization is only as strong as the community’s willingness to defend it and encourages users to speak up and stay engaged in protocol governance.

No_Pear1016

On Reddit probably not, but there are some weird games out there. Not that uncommon actually. And you can’t really poison a coinbase wallet, you don’t know how that works but still mention it? 🤷‍♂️ As i said, if conditions start changing its a scam. If he takes the coibase address and sends you money, he’s just a quirky/nice guy. But since OP is asking if it’s a scam, something is probably off

HeavyHittersShow

OP: Should I buy Bitcoin? Subreddit full of BTC hodlers: this fucking guy!

bas-machine

This would be the best answer if OP wasn’t full of shit

Fiercuh

The problem is if you did buy it at that time, asking the same question as OP, you would 100 % sell if it dipped. Because you don't understand what you bought If you have to ask then the answer is always no, do not buy Bitcoin

riscten

Pretty good stuff, quite comprehensive. Did you make this OP?

harvested

Best answer OP

MrRGnome

Thank you for this detailed and good faith comment. I've read the linked comment. > They don't actually manage your resources in any significant sense I expect as relates to bandwidth this has a relationship to number of peers. The more peers you are relaying too, the more bandwidth you're going to be consuming relating to these transactions. Versus as you suggest only downloading them once and keeping them in mempool, or a minimum of twice and rejecting them from the mempool. But you can explicitly manage your ram usage other ways. Yes these policies impact fee estimation. That seems an obvious and inevitable consequence of ignoring likely to be mined transactions in your mempool. That's likely true of any mempool policy, except maybe ignoring less than 1 sat/vbyte. > And you're a really well informed party, so the fact that you're not aware that it's at least arguable that it harms the network (separate from the potential justification of censorship issues) and potentially harms you is another argument that it probably shouldn't exist as a configuration. I disagree that it harms the network for me to choose local mempool or relay policies. As we both know the censorship arguments are baseless. But you are right, I am not informed on the block reconstruction latency argument. ** If you can convince me that this reconstruction latency is more than inconvenience I could have my mind changed.** I've read your linked comment. I don't necessarily agree with all the points. For example, as you suggest people will run alternative clients anyways with these options, core limiting the options doesn't prevent the minority from causing the impact you cite to reconstruction latency. I also generally disagree with you that people running alternative clients are a bad thing even in spite of the increased likelihood of consensus issues or whatever else. To me alternative clients are an inevitably reality of our network architecture we should be accepting, not fighting against - regardless of their risk. As well, I am curious the severity and consequences of this latency. I don't know that it is a given that is it more than an inconvenience to a well connected node, nor do I have reason to suspect this leads to loss for smaller miners when size of a mining operation doesn't have a direct relationship to network connectivity. This also follows for Joe Blow and spending unconfirmed and unpropagated outputs. To me these are largely questions of "is at least one of your peers reliably propagating these blocks". But I hear you suggesting even a small percentage of peers not propagating these blocks is causing significant harm, so I would like to hear how and to what degree. How often does it occur that a node is "eclipsed" by non-propagating peers? How severe is the reconstruction latency cost when 10%, 20% , 30% of peers are non-propagating? Do existing core settings, including disabling propagation or mempool entirely, bandwidth target settings, not also impact this reconstruction time? It may just be an inevitable reality of nodes managing their resources that this reconstruction time issue exists. As for potentially harming the individual, for example through incorrect fee estimation, I am aware of how that can be harmful especially in lightning or other automated security contexts relying on fee estimation. > You might think you're helping protect the network from spam, but it doesn't work I believe anyone who thinks this is being dishonest with themselves about how Bitcoin functions. It is an unfortunately popular belief but one I think we can all verify is false. You are not preventing spam, helping the network, or anything altruistic at all. If there is merit in managing your node it is in resource management. For those looking for nothing more than a warm fuzzy feeling, then sure they can have that too and enjoy the fact that their node isn't holding whatever it is in ram persistently. But it's very likely it will be holding something else, at least up to the ram usage limits set. > The substantive change in the PR isn't the removal of the option, it's the change to make its effective default unlimited. From a couple people in this thread (yourself and Fiach_Dubh at least) what I'm hearing is that you want the placebo. I think I can clear this up. We don't want the placebo, and we support the unlimited default. We want the datacarrier options. We strongly value our ability to manage our node and it's local function and resources. We aren't interested in blocking "spam". We want to manage our resources. If you can convince us that we are not doing that it would significantly blunt our position. We want everything from the option for no mempool to the option of an extremely parsed mempool - even if that limits the functionality of it or opens us up to shooting ourselves in the foot with misuse. Each to their use cases, and each node configuration to its use cases. Nodes must be sovereign, even if it allows them to hurt themselves. > It's not free to provide the placebo though, as it has maintenance overheads and to the extent that the concern about the non-finance data is a real concern it diverts attention away from other ideas My first use case, back before we had OP_RETURN, was non-finance data. Storing hashes and merkle tree roots of outside state systems for proof of state. I used this primarily for legal diligences. I think one of Bitcoin's greatest accomplishments is the economic, decentralized state machine. I believe these are incredibly important use cases that are currently dominated by scammers and I want to see them preserved and appropriately expensive so as to encourage their optimization and minimized use. I support OpenTimeStamps for example. > While discussing this here it does occur to me that there is a different line of compromise which might make more sense-- Bitcoin Core conflates relay policy and mining policy. The historical reason for this is that they should match or vaguely bad things happen. The expectation that fee estimation leads to block prediction, that relay and mining policies match, has never been founded in consensus or reality. It's just not how Bitcoin works and you know that. Miners are free to run whatever software they want and they have often chosen their own arbitrary forks and changes including for example facilitating "accelerators"bor as we saw in the blocksize wars signalling code they aren't running. Yes some bad things happen when this incorrect assumption is broken, especially for lightning, but I'm afraid that's just the reality of the network. It is Bitcoins strength and decentralization that anyone can run any node and change it how they want, not it's weakness, however inconvenient it may be. I'm open to being convinced on these issues. You have now spent a significant amount of your time and resources trying to convince me of your way of thinking, and I appreciate that. But I am afraid I am not convinced. That said, it's not your job to convince me. You have given me enough rational and breadcrumbs to verify some of these claims myself with some data collection and analysis. I will endeavour to do so. I appreciate your good faith criticism on these issues.

AutoModerator

This looks like a governance poll and has been filtered for mod review prior to voting. /u/CryptoMaximalist, /u/ominous_anenome, or another mod will give it a final review and let you know when it is approved or what needs to be adjusted. If everything is in order, approve the post, remove this comment. Otherwise OP should repost to correct the issue. Please verify these things * This is listed as an approved CCIP here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1LhhqB4UAezNMdAwjV3evFXPD2x1JFCFHdnm8rmyRqAE/edit?usp=sharing * This has the proper CCIP-### - prefix * The poll does not include misinformation and the plan is clear and unambiguous * The poll only has 2 options, the first is supportive and second is No Change * The poll is posted on Monday of Moon Week (The day of the snapshot) * The poll is set to run for 7 days * The poll is posted by u/MoonWeek *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CryptoCurrency) if you have any questions or concerns.*

AutoModerator

This looks like a governance poll and has been filtered for mod review prior to voting. /u/CryptoMaximalist, /u/ominous_anenome, or another mod will give it a final review and let you know when it is approved or what needs to be adjusted. If everything is in order, approve the post, remove this comment. Otherwise OP should repost to correct the issue. Please verify these things * This is listed as an approved CCIP here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1LhhqB4UAezNMdAwjV3evFXPD2x1JFCFHdnm8rmyRqAE/edit?usp=sharing * This has the proper CCIP-### - prefix * The poll does not include misinformation and the plan is clear and unambiguous * The poll only has 2 options, the first is supportive and second is No Change * The poll is posted on Monday of Moon Week (The day of the snapshot) * The poll is set to run for 7 days * The poll is posted by u/MoonWeek *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CryptoCurrency) if you have any questions or concerns.*

user_name_checks_out

Also: [Bitcoin Core's Github Mods Have Been Banning Users From Commenting and Hiding Comments That Are Pointing Out Some Inconvenient Truths About A Proposal To Remove OP_Return Limits and End User Choice](https://old.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1kab15o/bitcoin_cores_github_mods_have_been_banning_users/) [More info](https://old.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1kbdfzq/why_was_my_post_deleted/)

CosmicTraveller_369

Nice write up OP. POWSCHE conviction should be studied, builders build and believers believe 🏎️💨

MintedMokoko

Not one mention of the OP_Return change eh?

user_name_checks_out

There is this thread still. [Bitcoin Core's Github Mods Have Been Banning Users From Commenting and Hiding Comments That Are Pointing Out Some Inconvenient Truths About A Proposal To Remove OP_Return Limits and End User Choice](https://old.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1kab15o/bitcoin_cores_github_mods_have_been_banning_users/)

uncapchad

Just FYI for others coming here: From what I understand, OP\_Return allows for messages, images etc to be included in transactions. These have an 83byte size limit. The proposal is to remove/increase the limit. One camp says no non-financial data should allowed to be stored at all, the other camp says such data is inevitable, let's manage it better. Pros and cons on both sides of the fence. some summary of debate here [https://stacker.news/items/965828](https://stacker.news/items/965828)

Specialist-Front-007

OP please add +1 to your total for Humble Return 697

DirkDiggler1888

Yea, it's the tracking facility mentioned in the OP that I was specifically interested in.

aqwa_

It’s crazy how much some people bend reality to their liking in this sub. OP should leave Bitcoin and become an evangelical preacher instead. r/bitcoin is not a church, mate.

uncapchad

**F**rom what I understand, OP\_Return allows for messages, images etc to be included in transactions. These have an 83byte size limit. The proposal is to remove/increase the limit. One camp says no non-financial data should allowed to be stored at all, the other camp says such data is inevitable, let's manage it better. Pros and cons on both sides of the fence. [https://x.com/BikesandBitcoin/status/1916887010457063772](https://x.com/BikesandBitcoin/status/1916887010457063772) This is very rudimentary. I was under the impression that OP\_RETURNS were flagged as unspendable and therefore did not need to be stored in the UTXO database. Any additional enlightenment most welcome while I keep digging

MintedMokoko

OP_RETURN is used to store arbitrary data on the Bitcoin blockchain. Currently, it’s limited to 80 bytes (used to be 40). Removing or significantly raising that limit would allow users to embed large amounts of non-transactional data (like images, files, or even full documents), which inflates the blockchain size unnecessarily. Every full node must download and store the full blockchain. Larger blockchain = more resource requirements = fewer people able to run full nodes = centralization risk. Without limits, attackers could flood the blockchain with junk data, effectively using it as an immutable free storage system. This would clog blocks, drive up transaction fees, and degrade performance for legitimate monetary transactions. More data per transaction = larger mempool footprint. Block propagation times increase, and consensus between nodes could slow down, increasing the risk of orphaned blocks.

GerManic69

Yes you are 100% correct, using a limit order buying at a fixed price accomplishes exactly what im saying buying it in small chunks as we go to avoid moving the price against ourselves, you just put it in the technical of how its actually getting done and i appreciate you correxting that. The vibe or understanding I got from OP's post is that A) they dont understand list versus market orders, and B) are assuming these large institutional positions being scooped up instantly(via market order) thats why i responded as I did, to give the most simplistic understandable information so they can begin asking the "right" questions like "how" then it leads to your answer :)

samaral519

This subreddit is getting useless. There should be a subreddit for daily new on bitcoin, who is using it, what laws are being written, what’s happening to miners etc. Stuff that really matters. Anyone who posts this nonsense would like OP did here should get an immediate ban.

BeautifulShot

Sounds like the OP sold @ Market instead of Limit... There is no clicking sell unless I'm liquidating.

ConfuciusYorkZi

OP, please take this into consideration, this is a viable method, you realize the profits and can still own another house. Cheers.

RamoneBolivarSanchez

There is regulation it’s just fairly loose. Also OP using a self custodial service would have no relationship to “getting funds back” with regulation. Regulations wouldn’t get the users money back either in such an instance lol.

MrRGnome

What would you describe as the collateral harms of having policies more restrictive than consensus? This meta-drama? To me more restrictive mempool/relay policies are just about personal resource management and preference. In regards to the OP_RETURN issue, so long as datacarrier and datacarriersize persist as settings I don't really mind if the core default mempool/relay policy is to ignore everything over 83 bytes. I don't know if it's effective in achieving any specific goals, but it's certainly not hampering me.

trimbandit

Stability is a property of money that OP omitted. Bitcoin as it stands scores extremely low in this regard

omg_its_dan

This stat really isn’t very meaningful to OP’s question. Plenty of whole coiners don’t have a single UTXO with more than 1 BTC. On the other hand, whales likely have several UTXOs with more than 1 BTC. This also doesn’t consider the ETFs. In reality there is no way to ever know the true number.

Icy-South-3707

U started ur 1st comment with "OP"

alineali

Probably it could be done if it was a goal from the start - strict rules about address generation, some way to guarantee that address has a real public key in up to second "acceptance" transaction etc, but you would need to be a genius or prophet to predict what will be needed much later when adoption have grown so much. I rather dislike scripting because it basically opens all kinds of possibilities due to combinatorial explosion. This is a classic temptation for software developer and cypherpunk, but now that bitcoin became a real financial software we have a minefield that may lead to basically anything. How much time it took to think about all possible consequences of things like OP_CTV and co (it started, IIRC, from SIGHASH_ANYPREVOUT ages ago)?

Kessaveli

Fine write up and logic OP, I agree!

BlueM92

This is such a sexist view! And is totally a W for OP. I'm certain there's more than a "few" women that are into finance and to claim it still wouldn't click for them if a man really works on them is just obnoxious.

prompttheplanet

How could anyone not figure this out? OP’s screenshot question is hilarious.

AKFree2022

“Real Vision” seems to agree with your thesis, OP. https://x.com/realvision/status/1917026788007678079?s=46&t=VccoGQqyS86u5vUGVdnRXw

denfaina__

OP first statement is false since 1 BTC is actually (and will always be) valued 1 BTC.

2shyofa3sum

Stupid article posted with no commentary by OP. Garbage.

cosmicnag

This is the only post in this sub that matters. All shitcoiners (meth included) read this to save your wealth correctly for yourself and your future generations. Do not listen to shitcoiners like the OP peddling shitcoins like ethereum, they have been doing so since 2017 and that was their last ATH against bitcoin, friggin 7-8 years ago.

DuplicateDestroyer

**Your submission has been removed because at least 1 submission with the same title has posted on the subreddit recently.** **OP:** rahasyamayy **Date:** 2025-04-29 13:50:30 **Duplicates:** N | User | Date | Posted... | Similarity | Title :-:|:-:|:-:|:-:|:-:|:-:|:-:|:-: 0 | [/u/rahasyamayy](https://www.reddit.com/user/rahasyamayy) | 2025-04-29 13:43:28 | 7 minute(s) before| [100%](https://https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoMoonShots/comments/1kao9qa/your_gpu_is_bored_put_it_to_work_mining_dogegpu/) | [Your GPU is Bored – Put It to Work Mining DogeGPU ($DOGPU)! 🐶](https://redd.it/1kao9qa) I am a bot. If you believe this was sent in error, [please message the subreddit moderators here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCryptoMoonShots&subject=My+post+has+been+wrongfully+removed&message=My%20post%20has%20been%20wrongfully%20removed%20by%20your%20repost%20bot,%20/u/DuplicateDestroyer. Here%20is%20a%20link%20to%20my%20post : https://redd.it/1kaoffy). **Do not delete your post or moderators won't be able to review it.**

Low_Arm9230

Me with 0.1 bitcoin advising OP to buy one more bitcoin

Fiach_Dubh

> is the limit on OP_RETURN size part of blockchain rules? OP_Return limits in Bitcoin Core are relay policy rules. They are not consensus rules, therefore... > OW if a miner chose to include a transaction exceeding that limit in a block they mined, would that block be considered invalid by the network or not? ...such a block would be valid and accepted. Such blocks do exist. > so then what's the issue? The issue is more about what do node runners get to decide what to relay at the mempool level. In the past and currently this has been a soft power to restrict the amount of spam in the ecosystem. Now it's being proposed that end users should not even have this ability to restrict OP_Return spam at all when using new versions of Bitcoin Core.

Due_Performer5094

I didn't necessarily say that was good for the network. The OP was referring to Saylor's tweets.

rgmundo524

Wait... Is OP claiming that Ethereum's centralized L2's as Ethereum's performance?

Laukess

Does liana not do something similar to what you describe in your 3rd paragraph? You can have a 2-of-3 that degrade into a 1-of-3? OP: Can you use the 3rd key without the unencrypted key touching the internet? Even if you download it, go offline, decrypt it, and load it into a hardware wallet and then delete the file, I would still worry a cached version was left on the computer, or you forget to delete it or something like that. I don't know if this would actually be a good idea, but maybe if a hardware wallet could accept the encrypted key and decrypt it internally. You could load the decryption key into it before leaving, but I haven't heard about this being a thing, so it's probably not a good solution anyway. I think I would give a key to a friend that doesn't know your family members, and have them sign for you, when you need to transact. If this is rare, I think this will work. You could create a new single-sig if you want a wallet with a lot less bitcoin, that you can easily transact with. An alternative would be collaborative custody. You can have the company sigs for you, and you can probably set a lower limit, so you don't have to worry about a $5 wrench attack. I also think they have inheritance services. Bitcoin Keeper and liana looks promising.

Stormyy98x

Be more specific OP

Quantris

is the limit on OP_RETURN size part of blockchain rules? IOW if a miner chose to include a transaction exceeding that limit in a block they mined, would that block be considered invalid by the network or not?

loupiote2

Nope. Bip39 seed phrases were not used in 2014. OP probably had a private key, maybe encoded in WIF format, or some other form of encoded private key like those that were used by the kind of wallets used at the time.

fullofsmarts

This post might not be a scam, but it definitely has scam energy. Why does OP keep popping up to try and convince everyone his story is true even though he keeps getting downvoted. If the story is true, enjoy the life win and stop trying to convince the internet. Who cares if we believe you or not unless you have some sort of phase 2 scam planned.

IndependentCut4825

It's entirely possible that OP heard a story about someone doing this and subconsciously developed a false memory. They will never be able to remember the name of the app, because they never knew it at all.

nullc

> I think OP is trying to point out the irony of getting from participating in an open source project that is fundamentally about decentralization Decenteralization is also equally the freedom to ban anyone you want from your own space, so I think there is no irony on that point. Some Bitcoin github repository isn't Bitcoin, it's a place where some people interested in Bitcoin come together to collaborate on stuff they want to collaborate on. No one has a right to demand time and space on someone elses repository-- that's like walking into someone's garage and demanding equal time to debate them. :) Better irony would be that filtering out comments by people advocating for filtering out transactions is funny, as is the pro-filtering people being unhappy that they got filtered. :P

nullc

Flash drives are surprisingly non-durable and becoming more non-durable over time as the manufacturers cost optimize their products to the point of barely working at all. Years down the road they are likely to plug those drives in and find them unreadable. Unfortunately none of the current popular digital storage mechanisms really handle being tossed in a drawer and ignored for a long time. I don't have any great suggestions right now. I'm dubious about estates being able to both handle fancy multisig things while simultaneously not acting as a security risk. I think a better solution would be to adopt a key where there is a hidden OP_CSV path that lets a single 'estate key' take the funds but only if they haven't moved for a couple years... but I don't think this kind of solution is currently well supported by wallets, which makes it a practical non-starter.

metalzip

Achow101, Luke-Jr, no matter my views on size of that OP and that one issue, I just wanted to note this is good that there are discussions and some discourse among developers. Even if it also seems a bit concerning or annoying, small "fights" seem better that just always quiet acquiescence. Just as user of Bitcoin.

Mantis-Prawn

I personally believe that you should live the lifestyle that you want to live, whilst OP should live the lifestyles they want to live, and I will like to live the lifestyle that I like to live. 

00_Jose_Maria_00

This is not a good look Achow, not on you in particular, but on Core devs and specifically on the github moderation. I get that github is not the ideal place to be discussing non-technical things, but when a technical change is being discussed and pushed by someone who might have a conflict of interest, it is relevant to the technical discussion. I for one did NOT know about it, and it informs my opinion of this change. Removing OP\_return is not a small change, and the bigger the change the greater the scrutiny. As a Core user and node runner, I hope I can retain the choice to determine the size limit.

Mirved

There will come a time when price will be based on actual usage instead of hype. Once that happens OP has layout why ETH will be the clear winner.

Gaboik

OP_RETURN is a sort of "command" in Bitcoin script that allows arbitrary data to be stored on the BTC blockchain. There has been a limit to that amount of data, it used to be 40 bytes, now I think it's at 80 and now there are proposals to increase it further and prevent individual node operators from enforcing custom limits, from what I gather. It's a concern for decentralization because it could lead to bloating and spamming, making running a node less accessible. People expressing concerns about the proposal have been getting banned from participating in the discussions on GitHub, which is where open source software projects are often built by the community. I think OP is trying to point out the irony of getting from participating in an open source project that is fundamentally about decentralization

ReallyOrdinaryMan

OP when did you transitioned to 100% btc? Im just curious

Fiach_Dubh

OP_Returns are pretty easily readable messages. They're not that hidden. I'm not saying they SHOULD be unlimited, but I could live with it for a few reasons. Mostly because they are pruneable from nodes, so that can not stress node resources as much as other spam types that are not pruneable and more bloating/destructive to the utxoset. op_returns do use resources, but those resource need not be permanently stored. they can be removed after the fact. It may be a very old way for miners to make some extra revenue. arbitrary data inclusion isn't a new issue, it's been around for a very long time, and it often pays miners a bit more in revenue if there's a lot of it.

Get_the_nak

is the OP_Return where “hidden messages” can be written? Why should that be unlimited? Sounds like it uses resources. Is it a new way of making money for the miners?

Fiach_Dubh

Understood. Thank you. >meaning all future comments talking about the end of decentralized money as we know it will be considered redundant brigading. maybe I'm thinking too highly of myself, but I don't think my comment falls in this category/camp. I really would never claim that a change of OP_Return policy or removal of the toggle option is the end of Bitcoin itself. seems like hyperbole. To be honest, I'm fine with increasing the OP_Return default limit to uncapped. I'm not fine with removing the toggle altogether, denying end users the functional choice they have had for many years now.

Ethmanson

Good job OP

McBurger

OP’s post is more the bait. The tweet was way more mild than that, and to me sounds more like he was simply entertaining an amusing idea. It’s a stretch to use such certain terms to imply “HE ACTUALLY BELIEVES THIS”

PigletBaseball

OP wants to evade taxes

Decent_Taro_2358

Better not to post your exact holdings OP. You’ll be a target for many bad actors. Congratulations though!

calamitycase

I’ve read all the OP comments. I’ve used a jade with green and nunchuk. Honestly go with the coldcard q and nunchuk. It’s not that complicated. Btc sessions on YouTube has some really good tutorials on this setup. The reason is that air gapped on the jade is a faff compared to coldcard q.

PeterRegarrdo

Debt to GDP is over 100%, yes. But it's not an exponential growth rate, and it also goes up and down. Rates have been low for so long that it made sense to borrow more. The US is also in a unique position with USD being the reserve currency. Overall, the current ratio isn't really unsustainable at all. You also say it's never been worse, but that's not true. It was roughly the same post WW2 due to wartime spending. The economy boomed afterwards, and the growth caused the ratio to drop significantly. If the economy is managed correctly and inflation is kept in check, that can easily happen again. Unfortunately the guy pulling the strings doesn't seem to want to do that, so we'll see what happens. Overall, the implication that OP is making using the debt graph isn't supported and only plays to those who think government debt is the same thing as household debt.

bananabastard

What do you think is OP's best move right now? Lump sum or DCA? What would you advise someone who is ready to put $10k into BTC right now?

simonmales

OP learns today that other timezones exist.

JudgeCheezels

Imagine going into a casino and then asking for the roulette table charts. Yeah that’s how stupid your question sounds OP, no offence.

spooky_corners

But just owning Bitcoin doesn't significantly add to its decentralization. The value of decentralization is in the transaction/validation process. If this is a concern to the OP, they should not only hold Bitcoin but also run a node.

waitareyou4real

Why do I get the feeling OP has watched this video recently: https://youtu.be/m-Ct2ReT2NM?si=dGO6sRGb5MGNKflZ

Curious-Cat-70

I completely agree with OP re current modes of self-custody being the biggest obstacle to widespread adoption of BTC by the average person. I am a tertiary educated Gen X professional and have done heaps of research on the centralised inflationary fiat system vs the decentralised and finite supply of the BTC system. While I’m still on the learning journey, I feel I have a good handle on the main principles and am completely convinced of the potential of BTC as a hedge against inflation and for control over your own funds, but I’m really struggling to take the leap into actually investing anything significant. Being someone who worries over my internet passwords being written down in a little book, I find the responsibility of securing my own BTC to be hugely daunting, especially as I find digital security challenging already. It’s not like you can just trust a geek to help as you definitely do not want to be shouting it about that you’re stacking crypto and end up potentially making yourself a target. Not all of us have enough trusted people in our lives to let into the “secret”, and I don’t even know where to start with finding fire-, water-, and theft-proof places to hide paper or metal seed phrases or eventually even setting things up for bequeathing in my will. I’ve spent countless hours searching the internet for assistance on these things, and it is not easy to find simple solutions that don’t still leave you with massive risk of exposure to loss or theft of your coins. I’m struggling to understand how to implement suggested additional security layer concepts like multi-sig and passphrase and air-gapped etc. Imagine if self-custody of digital currency was the main system for society at large, and the huge seeds of distrust that would be sown between everyone having to hide their secret words from everyone else while they all knew they were doing that! We’d be back to the days of people robbing each other for the “cash under the mattress” because it isn’t locked in a bank vault! Btw, this is my first ever Reddit comment so please be kind😅

ecky--ptang-zooboing

That truly seems to be the mindset of people like OP 😅

AllTalksExpert

The OP mentioned a 10-15 year timeframe, so I'm talking about the long-term perspective. I'm confident that in the long run, Bitcoin will outperform gold. I'm also certain that, in the long run, Bitcoin's market cap will surpass that of gold, mainly because of its use case.

p0Nd3R1Ng_hYp0Th3s1s

OP, with all due respect, you are a dimwit for not using a cold wallet

rote_it

>it matters that you not only stack, but most important you hodl and wait Counterpoint, what if OP follows the buy 500 days before the halving and sell 500 after strategy? Over time wouldn't that potentially catch him up compared to the usual just buy and hodl mantra?

harvested

OP you can already see where things are heading so you're miles ahead of anyone else just blindly allocating to SPX or buying condos.

MakeItMine2024

OP are you kidding BTC is your ace in the hole. A friend of mine bought 10 BTC at an average of 25,000 each without telling his wife. He said she doesn’t need to know of she would make him sell it. Keep stacking

Analog_AI

OP, in the case of IBIT, yes, you are reducing the supply available for sale, because they are required by law to keep bitcoin and their claims on a 1:1 basis, since they are a spot ETF. The futures ETFs don't have to keep their bitcoin holdings at 1:1 ratios, or indeed any bitcoins. Those are disreputable companies.

Zayoodo0o132

Woah, how does that work. Are you tipping OP? Where are the sats coming from?

110010010011

Maybe OP has millions. Then it’s pretty bad.

Fantastic-Tadpole-43

I think OP does have a point. Maybe not only for custody but also a service that ensures you do not send BTC to the wrong address. Because humans make mistakes and if Bitcoin gets widely adopted, people are going to make transactions carelessly. This might have desastrous consequences for some individuals. I do not necessarily see this as contradictory to Bitcoin's ethos because no one would be forced to use it. And it would not affect the supply if everything is verifiable on the blockchain. I do not know, however, what a service like this should look like in detail. But you will never get mass adoption if there is a risk of losing funds due to human error. People like Ctrl+Z.

20seh

This is the correct answer OP!

The_Realist01

That’s actually not a bad way at all, OP.

Federal-Rhubarb-3831

Lame and boring. OP isn’t desperate as well

Good_Extension_9642

Hey OP, BTC is proof of work, anymore saying it can be stake is laying to you

trickfan277

Do you all remember when you started in crypto? From the way you're treating the OP it seems most of you never made a mistake while learning. Yeah, it's so easy to make fun of someone else who's been taken and then "let's just hurt them more by laughing at them instead of offering genuine help and empathy I am nowhere near perfect. Made lots of mistakes and will make more. My reason for posting? I just don't like the feeling I had in my stomach after reading the put downs. There's enough pain in this world already

riscten

OP apparently bought this from [https://electro.sell.app](https://electro.sell.app) From the site: "Welcome to my store! I have a variety of electronics" The inventory: Literally just a GTX5090 and "Old Google Play Console Accounts" What kind of scam are you running here OP?

Tropicthunder07

OP i extend an olive branch because I'm also very very new to BTC. 1st... ALL of these people commenting like their opinions are to be followed like the word of God will disappear should you ever fall on hard times. Please do your own research, educate *yourself, and invest how you see fit. There's a laundry list of things to research: finding a trustworthy exchange, cold wallet storage device, physical storage of cold wallet, how to store your seed phrase, transfer fees, taxes whenever you transfer back to fiat and if we'll be under a Republican or Democratic pro/negative crypto party, etc, etc, etc. People say if you want to make money you need to follow the money. Forget about "whales" the gargantuan investors are investing in the Trillions: I'm talking National governments and financial Institutions; USA, China, Strategy, Black Rock, 21. Russia & China already using BTC to trade oil & gas. Historically any commodity that has reached the 3 trillion mark has never failed to last longterm. Don't use coinbase. I use River but others prefer Strike, Kracken, etc. Start investing $100/wk or just ape in and invest 1k out the gate and... just watch it. Watch it hourly, daily, for a *month. THIS IS A TORTURE TEST. If you can't survive one month without pulling out then BTC is not for you. It is the epitome of volatile. Its volatility is a gift to the average person because if it wasn't risky short term it'd be too easy and the rich would've already bought the supply out. Eventually you'll learn to understand the DCA daily cost average and to pay less attention. BTC is a longterm leap of faith, but if you follow the money, the gargantuan investors that don't lose are aping in by the Trillions. Sorry for the wall of text. With more time invested in educating yourself will come more comfort with your decisions. Good luck and have fun.