Bitcoin already has a spam prevention system called "fees". I don't believe it's insufficient. The only issue is the stochastic nature of its effectiveness
Which can be resolved with things like payment pools, tree payments ( https://utxos.org/uses/scaling/), etc. On Fri, Dec 29, 2023, 9:33 AM Greg Tonoski via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > Unfortunately, as near as I can tell there is no sensible way to > > prevent people from storing arbitrary data in witnesses ... > > To prevent "from storing arbitrary data in witnesses" is the extreme > case of the size limit discussed in this thread. Let's consider it along > with other (less radical) options in order not to lose perspective, > perhaps. > > > ...without incentivizing even worse behavior and/or breaking > > legitimate use cases. > > I can't find evidence that would support the hypothesis. There had not > been "even worse behavior and/or breaking legitimate use cases" observed > before witnesses inception. The measure would probably restore > incentives structure from the past. > > As a matter of fact, it is the current incentive structure that poses > the problem - incentivizes worse behavior ("this sort of data is toxic > to the network") and breaks legitimate use cases like a simple transfer > of BTC. > > > If we ban "useless data" then it would be easy for would-be data > > storers to instead embed their data inside "useful" data such as dummy > > signatures or public keys. > > There is significant difference when storing data as dummy signatures > (or OP_RETURN) which is much more expensive than (discounted) witness. > Witness would not have been chosen as the storage of arbitrary data if > it cost as much as alternatives, e.g. OP_RETURN. > > Also, banning "useless data" seems to be not the only option suggested > by the author who asked about imposing "a size limit similar to OP_RETURN". > > > But from a technical point of view, I don't see any principled way to > > stop this. > > Let's discuss ways that bring improvement rather than inexistence of a > perfect technical solution that would have stopped "toxic data"/"crap on > the chain". There are at least a few: > - https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28408 > - https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29146 > - deprecate OP_IF opcode. > > I feel like the elephant in the room has been brought up. Do you want to > maintain Bitcoin without spam or a can't-stop-crap alternative, everybody? > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev >
_______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
