🎉 #Gate xStocks Trading Share# Posting Event Is Ongoing!
📝 Share your trading experience on Gate Square to unlock $1,000 rewards!
🎁 5 top Square creators * $100 Futures Voucher
🎉 Share your post on X – Top 10 posts by views * extra $50
How to Participate:
1️⃣ Follow Gate_Square
2️⃣ Make an original post (at least 20 words) with #Gate xStocks Trading Share#
3️⃣ If you share on Twitter, submit post link here: https://www.gate.com/questionnaire/6854
Note: You may submit the form multiple times. More posts, higher chances to win!
📅 End at: July 9, 16:00 UTC
Show off your trading on Gate Squ
Controversial Changes to Bitcoin Codes Being Discussed! The Community is Divided, Here are the Details
Bitcoin Core developers are planning to completely remove the 80-byte data limit on OP_RETURN outputs in the upcoming release of the Bitcoin (BTC) software. This move has sparked discussions within the developer community.
OP_RETURN is a feature that allows a small amount of data to be embedded in Bitcoin transactions and creates an unspendable output (UXTO). This method gained significant attention, especially during the ordinals and inscription craze that occurred in early 2024.
Bitcoin Core contributor Greg Sanders stated in a GitHub announcement on May 5 that the current 80-byte limit would be completely removed and an unlimited number of OP_RETURN outputs would be allowed. Sanders argued that the current limit has lost its functionality and that removing this restriction would encourage less harmful behaviors on the chain.
"This boundary directs users towards alternatives that are more challenging for the network and lack transparency," said Sanders, arguing that large data inscriptions and various indirect methods used to bypass the existing limit lead to unnecessary load on the network, and added: "When the gentle path is closed, determined users turn to non-gentle paths. Some use naked multisig or fake output keys, which is exactly the outcome that OP_RETURN aimed to prevent."
Developers evaluated three options: maintaining the border, enhancing it, or completely removing it. While the first two options were deemed arbitrary and ineffective, the proposal for unlimited access found broad but non-consensual support in discussions on GitHub.