Damus
Jeff · 1d
I've yet to hear anyone say what would be negative about bip110 if it was widely accepted (which I realize is not the case yet). Shouldn't we be asking core to implement it as well? Why don't they?
Zsubmariner profile picture
Ideally they would. Easy for me to say coming in and Monday morning quarterbacking, but it seems like this whole situation is wildly political for no reason. The conversation would ideally have been:

"Hey, we're behind on some maintenance. Let's drop some cruft, tighten some unnecessarily loose data limits that are feeding non-monetary use and kill the inscriptions hack."

Then we would have a calmly go through back testing against the chain to make sure we didn't chop any legit monetary use and roll the thing. It's not that hard.

And then I assume there would be hot cocoa with marshmallows. โ˜•

Obviously that ignores that there are incentives, financial interests, rivalries, reputations, egos and tribes. I'm not surprised this is hard for non-technical reasons. My point is just how purely non-technical problem actually is here.

The actual technical problem itself could have been solved by small number of people in a matter of weeks if they were working together well. Instead we have a total shitstorm.

Whatever. It will be fine, but I have to be pro 110 on the merits until someone can explain why its a bad idea from on the merits. ๐Ÿฟ

๐Ÿ‘1