The publication of the Bitcoin Core V30 has widened the cracks between the Bitcoiners. For some, it’s a proper step, and for others, it means moving away from the original design of the protocol.
One of the hottest changes in the core update is increasing data limits. OPCODE op_return, that SALTA from 83 bytes to 100,000 bytes threshold. This will take place in version 30 in October.
This threshold adjustment allows Prevents much wider inscriptions in network filesfrom text to images and files, some people consider the extras (“spam”).
For the community sector, its novelty betrays the original spirit of Bitcoin, separating it from its true nature as a pure digital currency, while others choose to defend against the expansion of the Bitcoin case or defend users as deciding how they use the network.
The truth is that Core’s decisions have passion, fragmenting the bitcoiners of the facets, fueling the “customer war” that has shaken the community’s foundations in recent months.
Overcome opinions in the Bitcoin community
Gloria Zhao, one of Core’s main maintainers, explained that the most relevant motivation for changes in the limits of OP_Return was “to correct damage and inconsistencies in standardization of data storage technology.”
According to the collaborator, to match Op_return to the cutout option, the changes are ready to be integrated after evaluating technical debates and considering the objections. Avoid UTXO inflation (non-dose transaction output).
Avoiding UTXO inflation means preventing unnecessarily growing sets of incredible output. This keeps the efficiency of the network.
In an analysis of Bitcoin Core’s proposal, Zhao argued:
«Another motivation is to support the public and decentralized markets of Bitcoin in block space and prevent transaction broadcasting policies from becoming more stringent than they can be trusted. The Op_return limit is for a small number of policy rules that exist solely to block its use. These restrictions force people (for example, those who don’t want to inflate the UTXO set) to direct transport to miners. ”
Gloria Zhao, Bitcoin Core Maintenant.
On his part, another core developer, Greg Sanders, said elimination of that limitation “creates at least two tangible benefits.”
With “more consistent and pre-determined behavior,” Sanders refers to how Bitcoin Core software adopts a retransmission policy by eliminating strict restrictions on op_return (adopting a retransmission policy).relay) more uniform and predictable for nodes.
This means that nodes process transactions with rotatable data in a standardized way, avoiding discrepancies that previously required direct shipping or filtering, improving network efficiency and consistency.
The Zhao and Sanders statements show consensus among Bitcoin Core developers about the need to update client rules, including the 83-byte limit for op_return. There are current features of the network according to what they understand the policy.
Along the same line, Adam Back, Blockstream Co Founders have already warned that the next update of Core V.30 will be performed, as reported by Cryptonotics. Other related collaborators and participants in the Bitcoiner ecosystem will be accompanied by Back’s position.
Parker Lewis, manager of Bitcoin (BTC) payments company, defends Bitcoin Core not denounces the network by filtering transactions. “Filtering transactions is not censorship.”
He argues that this practice does not change the basic definition of networks. Lewis emphasizes that Filtering is a technical configuration It does not interfere with valid transactions and maintains the integrity of Bitcoin.
You support the knot
This approach contrasts with the attitude of Bitcoin Knot enthusiasts who are aware of the changes that the new Bitcoin Core Update will bring. Non-monatary use It is said that Bitcoin can be deflected from its original purpose.
From the MyNode site, they pointed out that «Knots give you options like a powerful Mempool filter, Op_return boundary, spam resistance policy and more. Everything can be controlled via configuration. You’re not just doing Bitcoin, you’re defining it».
Bitcoiner and node operator of Knots client Bitcoinmechanic has been completely caught up in the conflict.
On the transmission issued by YouTube on August 11th, he said that Bitcoin Core It undermines the integrity of Bitcoin When relaxing the filter of spamAllows low-cost transactions (-1 sat/vbyte) and any data (such as runes and inscriptions) that will conges the network.
Mechanics accuse Core of allowing transactions at rates below 1 sat/vbyte, Promotes spam in the chainInstead of promoting integration of UTXO (Unbound Transaction Outputs), it is a legal use.
He says that Nodes that relax these policiesaccepts transactions that do not meet a given minimum SAT/VBYTE, and contributes to half blank blocks with low quality content that affects network efficiency.
According to him, the decision reflects a lack of commitment to Bitcoin protection against non-monatary use.
The elimination of these filters along with the lack of action on new forms of spamthat’s an intentional decision Spammer and those seeking to monetize their networks for non-financial uses; Any data storage etc.
Furthermore, the mechanics question the impact of the core default values, such as the 83-byte limit for op_return.
He warns that by eliminating these filters it will enable the inclusion of arbitrary data, slowing the spread of blocks, and that it will support large miners in front of small mines.
For him, the nodes verifying such transactions are attacking the network. So we propose to strengthen our filters and migrate to Bitcoin Knots, an alternative client that already employs over 17% of the nodes in our network.
It is worth remembering that when the order market exploded in 2023, the Bitcoin network was crowded and allowed. Rates up to $30.
There was no emotional discussion
On an important line to Core, Tomer Strolight states: One-sided update It’s more of an attack than any “spam”. He also predicts version 30, “probably the least adopted, and perhaps the last one.”
Meanwhile, Bitcoin Miner prays in X, “Don’t update Core 30 when it’s published.” He further exclaimed: «Change the node software to knots. If you believe in Bitcoin and want to be here for your grandchildren, you have to fight for it».
Another more direct user stated: «Bitcoin Core 30 is a malicious virus. Bitcoin knots run instead». Others hold the largest positions more. People don’t help broadcast “chain trash” using Core V.30 because they say “Let’s keep Bitcoin for the next 1000 years.”
Others warned that Bitcoin would be moved for that purpose, “filling up a meme, dap or NFT network.” It makes that fee more expensiveothers said, “It’s strange to praise decentralization, and at the same time, it’s strange to promise to run a core V30 without supporting solutions that empower miners.”
