OverviewExploreTrending
Nostr Archives
OverviewExploreTrending
Rusty Russell15d ago
It adds an entire transaction! Every time it does that, it uses up farmore space than an 80-byte OP_RETURN. So your conclusion is that it's not spam if it looks like a normal transaction to you?
šŸ’¬ 2 replies

Thread context

Root: 0c1f266cd15c…

Replying to: aa917b80f8c2…

Replies (2)

JackTheMimic15d ago
If we are not conflating spam (content) with spam (quantity), yes. Data hidden via stagnography is not a future IBD issue. I am not a reactionary here, I just don't like the intentional mischaracterization of a reasonable approach. Creating more of a validation burden on future nodes is the threat, in my estimation.
0000 sats
aj13d ago
If OTS ever implements sign to contract, it could just be an ordinary 1in 1out payment, which would be less than a tx with a 40 byte opreturn. https://github.com/opentimestamps/python-opentimestamps/p…
0000 sats