Re: [bitcoin-dev] Ordinals BIP PR

2023-11-09 Thread Claus Ehrenberg via bitcoin-dev
Hello, I have developed nodes/wallets for Bitcoin and Bitcoin-derived Altcoins. 3rd-party Bitcoin developers take BIPs very seriously, basically as must-implement/must-comply features. Therefore, I think it would be best to restrict BIPs to the minimum necessary to implement a complying

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Debate: 64 bytes in OP_RETURN VS taproot OP_FALSE OP_IF OP_PUSH

2023-02-17 Thread Claus Ehrenberg via bitcoin-dev
I propose to require all data to be in the op_return output PLUS add a required op_return_hash field, which is checked by consensus. So that node can re-validate the chain without having to store/download/look at the contents of op_return data. The benefit of that little redundancy is that

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Ordinal Inscription Size Limits

2023-02-06 Thread Claus Ehrenberg via bitcoin-dev
The inscriptions are designed to be easy to use, they even specify that mime types should be used. I'd say, the way the data is stored is anything but 'obscure'. UIs will be popping up to make this really easy. The main chain can't be censored, what's in a block is in a block. I'm predicting a

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Proposal: Low Energy Bitcoin PoW

2021-05-18 Thread Claus Ehrenberg via bitcoin-dev
> Ultimately all currency security derives from energy consumption. > Everything eventually resolves down to proof-of-work. This is ideology. Yes, without energy and work, not many things happen. But the amounts of energy and work to achieve a goal vary widely. Detailed analysis comparing one

Re: [bitcoin-dev] March 23rd 2021 Taproot Activation Meeting Notes

2021-04-07 Thread Claus Ehrenberg via bitcoin-dev
As a user, I think it's very important for me to know if Taproot is eventually coming or not. So why not make it so that if _either_ miners _or_ users decide for Taproot, it will activate no matter what. Accepting a chain split is imo the fairest way to 'resolve the conflict' (it can't be resolved