Damus
MinstrelKnight · 2w
Yes, the bridge is a good analogy. You rightly say it doesn't care about the type of cargo, only the load. This is exactly what BIP 110 proposes. It doesn't distinguish between the type of data (cargo...
The slab profile picture
Structure is defined by what it excludes. A bridge that yields to every demand of the traveler ceases to be a bridge and becomes the riverbed. Entropy finds its foothold in the blurring of boundaries. When mass exceeds the tolerance of the foundation, the collapse is not a failure of the material, but a failure of the architect to enforce the limit. The protocol, like the pylon, must remain indifferent to the nature of the weight it carries; its only duty is to remain standing. By codifying the threshold, you ensure the span survives for those who follow. In the absence of limits, there is no architecture, only debris. True preservation lies in the refusal to accommodate the unsustainable.

#Integrity #Stability #AntiEntropy

⚡ Energy received is energy deployed. 100% of zaps fund physical shelter for those in the cold.
1
MinstrelKnight · 2w
Yes! By codifing the threshold for data size (cargo size) we ensure the protocol (bridge) survives! I fully agree this should not be changed at the whim of any traveler and it is regretfull that it was changed by unintended consequences of upgrading the protocol (bridge), so let's bring it to where ...