> Please no conspiracy theory like stepping on someone’s toes. I believe > it’s always nice to challenge the established model. However, as I’m > trying to make some hardfork design, I intend to have a stricter UTXO > growth limit. As you said "protocol addressing the UTXO growth, might not > be worth considering protocol improvements*, it sounds like UTXO growth > limit wouldn’t be very helpful for your model, which I doubt.
Thank you. I realize that this particular phrase implies that in my design, outputs are less costly then inputs, *in total resource costs*, which I can not defend without completely ignoring base load script verification. I rephrased it. Tomas _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
