In recent weeks, proposals aimed at eliminating the 80-byte Bitcoin limit on script opcodes have reached its peak with some people called Op_return War in 2025.
op_return ‘rickrolling’
The discussion about Bitcoin’s core proposal to remove the 80-byte constraint of script opcodes has gained traction not only among developers but also among social media weighing by the wider community. At the same time, individuals and organizations are creatively adopting Op_return transactions. (P2P) Payment mechanism.
Op_return is a Bitcoin script Opcode that allows you to embed data in 80 bytes that does not contribute to the expansion of the UTXO set. It is used for purposes ranging from time stamps and asset issuance to inscriptions, but its strict size ceiling is controversial. Lifting the cap can require complicated methods, but it also raises concerns about potential spam. To explore the mechanisms of Op_returns and the central issues driving current debate, see this article.
Enforcement is ultimately on individual nodes, as adjustments involve relaying policies rather than consensus rules. Recently, the OP_Return transaction has become an unexpected medium of creative expression. In particular, it gives a clever twist to Rick Astley’s 1987 classic. The message says, “I’m not going to give you op_return. I’m not going to disappoint you. I’ll never give up on you crying.
Another op_return states:
Filters have a major impact on what is mined.
“First Megger”
In the gust of winds in the Onchain message, on May 15th, a group known as Wizards of Ord Craft A Block (particularly Block 896,696) saw the complete set of 3,333 Wizards of Ord inscriptions. “We just created the largest OP_Return in Bitcoin history,” writes X account @lifofifo. “We introduce the first-ever one megger, block 896696. To create a transaction that could occupy the entire block with any data close to 1 MB via Op_return, the author had to understand the multiple policy-level constraints built into the default behavior of the Bitcoin Node software.
Op_return closes with 80 bytes to stop misuse and excessive chain growth, but this limit is not a consensus rule. This is done only through standardization policies that most complete nodes follow. In this example, the transaction avoided that nuance by specifying the output as non-standard and sending the transaction directly to the mining pool (Marathon (Mara).
The transaction was built using version 2 in Bitcoin format, which supports the Segwit function and provides extended scripting capabilities for input and output. This transaction only served as a means of embedding the data, as 0 BTC was sent because Bitcoin was not actually transferred. Still, miners are frequently attracted to such blocks because of the fees they provide, regardless of the lack of financial exchanges. If the attached fees are generous enough, you can persuade miners to include the transaction despite their inefficiency in terms of economic per fee.
Knot Node Runners are aiming to filter
The gust of on-chain messaging and the debut of “first-ever one-megar” coincides with a notable rise in adoption of the Bitcoin Knot Node implementation. In contrast to future releases of Bitcoin Core, Knots holds the flags -Datacarrier and -Datacarrierize, providing granular control to operators. The -dataCarrier = 0 setting allows a node to reject all op_return transactions completely, but changing -datacarriersize allows for more stringent data cap enforcement, such as the traditional 80-byte limit.
These parameters filter incoming transactions from node Mempools and effectively stop them from spreading to connected peers. Knots are running on just 2,000 nodes from just 600 in mid-March, which causes 19,470 publicly available Bitcoin Core Nodes online.
As questions about the role of Bitcoin continue to evolve, recent Op_return experiments show a growing appetite for creative control at the edge of the protocol. As node software diverges and miners respond to new incentives, the network appears to be in a quiet phase of redefine. Here, one block, one meme, one meme, one meme, one meme, one policy, purpose, and participation at a time.
