Bitcoin Mailing List on Nostr: 🔖 Title: Debate: 64 bytes in OP_RETURN VS taproot OP_FALSE OP_IF OP_PUSH 🏷️ ...

🔖 Title: Debate: 64 bytes in OP_RETURN VS taproot OP_FALSE OP_IF OP_PUSH
🏷️ Categories: bitcoin-dev
👥 Authors:
• Christopher Allen ( Christopher Allen [ARCHIVE] (npub19g4…t5d0) )
• Claus Ehrenberg ( Claus Ehrenberg [ARCHIVE] (npub1a8c…3wff) )
• Rijndael ( Rijndael [ARCHIVE] (npub1zhs…3hc5) )
• Anthony Towns ( Anthony Towns [ARCHIVE] (npub17rl…9l2h) )
• Aymeric Vitte ( Aymeric Vitte [ARCHIVE] (npub15fc…5grz) )
• Peter Todd ( Peter Todd [ARCHIVE] (npub1m23…2np2) )
• Andrew Poelstra ( Andrew Poelstra [ARCHIVE] (npub1ae2…5t04) )
• Russell O'Connor ( Russell O'Connor [ARCHIVE] (npub1dw8…plrw) )
• Kostas Karasavvas ( Kostas Karasavvas [ARCHIVE] (npub1tqa…3e9m) )
🗒️ Conversation Summary: The debate is on the most efficient way to place 64 bytes into the Bitcoin blockchain, with suggestions including traditional OP_RETURN and spent taproot transactions. The current standard for OP_RETURN in Bitcoin is a maximum of 80 bytes and one output per transaction, but some suggest increasing the size of OP_RETURN to support a hash, signature, and metadata. There is ongoing discussion on changing the OP_RETURN size in Bitcoin, but ultimately requires code changes and community consensus for implementation.
📅 Messages Date Range: 2023-01-31 to 2023-02-18
✉️ Message Count: 34
📚 Total Characters in Messages: 75198