{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub1k2eekmevs6gg60df75qpjw4a2atmy89vx28c8zqq5jxy64tuzrws39qd6m","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub1k2eekmevs6gg60df75qpjw4a2atmy89vx28c8zqq5jxy64tuzrws39qd6m","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2015-11-01\n📝 Original message:On 11/01/2015 05:46 PM, Tier Nolan via bitcoin-dev wrote:\n\u003e An OP_CAT script that requires TBs of RAM to validate crosses the\n\u003e threshold of reasonableness. \n\nAre there actually any OP_CAT scripts currently in the utxo set?\n\nIt's one thing to have a theoretical scripting ability that gets removed\nbefore anyone actually uses it - that doesn't put anyone in the position\nof retroactively making decisions about the validity of someone else's\nmoney.\n\nPresently the utxo set is about $5 billion worth of other people's money.\n\nIt's a lot easier to justify the position: \"nobody has the right to\nchange the meaning of someone else's outputs\", than it is to justify,\n\"some small group of people gets to decide what's standard and what\nisn't, and if you choose to use the network in a valid but nonstandard\nway, that group of people might choose to deny you access to your money\nin the future\"\n\nIn other words, how close to the shores of \"administrators of a virtual\ncurrency\" do Bitcoin developers want to sail?\n\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nA non-text attachment was scrubbed...\nName: 0xEAD9E623.asc\nType: application/pgp-keys\nSize: 23337 bytes\nDesc: not available\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20151101/173b3946/attachment-0001.bin\u003e\n-------------- next part --------------\nA non-text attachment was scrubbed...\nName: signature.asc\nType: application/pgp-signature\nSize: 801 bytes\nDesc: OpenPGP digital signature\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20151101/173b3946/attachment-0001.sig\u003e"}