A storm is brewing Bitcoin (BTC) Developer CommunityFor the first time in almost a decade, there is a risk of ecosystem collapse. A technical dispute over the use of Bitcoin’s OP_RETURN function has escalated into a full-blown ideological clash that could end in a hard fork. The conflict challenges the very foundation of BTC’s purpose and puts those who seek to preserve BTC’s identity in trouble. pure monetary system I object to those who see this as the basis for broader innovation.
Bitcoin OP_RETURN controversy
The latest controversy arose from a proposed amendment. OP_RETURN operation codeThis allows data to be inserted into Bitcoin transactions. Bitcoin Core v30A network software update released earlier this year expanded the OP_RETURN limit from 80 bytes to 100,000 bytes. This change has sparked a backlash among developers and community members who are concerned that it could turn the network into a storage layer for arbitrary data, including: Illegal or harmful content and child sexually abusive material (CSAM).
Regarding this, Bitcoin developer Dathon Ohm said: introduction BIP-444, temporary hard fork proposal Limit adding arbitrary data On a consensus-level blockchain. The goal of this plan is to simplify the code base and reduce the risk of inserting illegal material while maintaining its functionality as a monetary network.
Ohm emphasized that the growing popularity of Bitcoin on GitHub and the widespread adoption of Bitcoin Core v30 make it necessary to evolve the proposal originally discussed. Veteran developer Luke Dashjr. He explained that both proactive and reactive deployment models are being developed and are still being tested.
Creating tension with fork suggestions Within the community. Supporters argue that limiting OP_RETURN is essential to protect node operators from potential legal exposure, noting that some jurisdictions impose stiff penalties for hosting illegal content. But critics argue that such restrictions are contradictory. Bitcoin’s Censorship Resistance Spirit And neutrality.
One member within the GitHub group argues that Bitcoin should not be a content moderation system and that limiting arbitrary data storage maintains that role. decentralized currency. Others warn that a focus on legitimacy could lead governments to influence it and undermine its core principles. Ohm countered that while the network itself remains permissionless, individuals should still consider the real-world consequences of running nodes that can store prohibited data.
The looming threat of hard forks
As the controversy and internal conflict surrounding OP_RETURN intensified, developers began to publicly speculate that it might be BIP-444. proposal Failure to reach a consensus may ultimately lead to a hard fork.
Prominent Bitcoin developers warn that the risks are quite high. Dashjr called The current OP_RETURN extension is “absolutely crazy”, they warn, and could turn the network into a data dump rather than a financial protocol. Another developer, Jason Hughes, vice president of development and engineering at Ocean Mining. accused Supporters who push Bitcoin as a “worthless altcoin” say the hard fork changes undermine Bitcoin’s neutrality. mark The death of a pioneering cryptocurrency.
People like Bitcoin engineer Peter Todd famous Earlier this year, if developers really want to Suppress on-chain spam and maintain efficiency.They could implement a soft fork that requires every byte string in a transaction to represent a valid hash or public key. This approach makes publishing arbitrary data expensive, but maintains backward compatibility.
Featured image created with Dall.E, chart from Tradingview.com
editing process for focuses on providing thoroughly researched, accurate, and unbiased content. We adhere to strict sourcing standards, and each page is diligently reviewed by our team of top technology experts and seasoned editors. This process ensures the integrity, relevance, and value of the content for readers.
