Over the past 90 days, inscriptions and transactions with OP_Return have been maintained prominently on the Bitcoin network.
As mentioned on September 30th, the Mempool developer known in X as Orangesurf represents these operations “40% of the total transaction”.
During that same period, Orangesurf said these types of transactions contributed «10% of the commission paid on the network And that weight is equivalent to 28% of the total processed in Bitcoin.
op_return in bitcoin is an option (operation code) that allows you to include any data in a transaction such as messages, text, or images.
As Cryptootics notified, the current representativeness of the OP_Return operation in Bitcoin is at least in April of this year. Almost half of all transactions were non-monatary.
Other reports, June and July, reflect the continued trend.
Technical discussion in Bitcoin regarding inscriptions
The weight of a transaction that contains data via op_return or inscription reflected in the written data; Reinvigorated technical debate Within the Bitconner community.
Several developers consider these uses Increases the pressure in the block space It can affect both cost and network performance.
In this connection, on September 22nd, developer Mike Schmidt, who is also the executive director of Brink, a nonprofit that funds Bitcoin Core, reported on X.
I opened a pull request (PR) in Bitcoin Core to eliminate disapproval of DataCarrier and DataCarrierize options. I understand that this is a sensitive issue for the core Bitcoin users…
Mike Schmidt, developer Bitconnor.
The expression “open PR” means that other collaborators will review and suggest changes to the source code to ultimately integrate.
In this case, Schmidt presented his PR to the Bitcoin Core repository to reverse the abort of options (or marked as outdated). «DataCarrier Y Datacarrierize».
These options allow nodes Determine whether to accept transactions using embedded data Establish the maximum size of that data.
The developer explains in the repository that his goal is to eliminate the “obsolete” state of core version 30 to avoid confusion between users. Therefore, increase the amount of non-monatary information It can be included in each transaction.
For Schmidt, clarification and maintaining these options can help reduce confusion over managing non-sales transactions. When the amount is still high (As a detail of OrangeSurf).
After the announcement of Pr de Schmidt, some developers expressed distrust About the true scope of the proposal. For example, Leo said:
This seems to be damage control. After that, the core developer can say: “I’ve seen and heard of it, but you can still configure a data carrier.” On the other hand, the default value remains high for scandals and -datacarrier is still broken.
Leo, Bitconnor developer.
With this phrase, Leo is the opening of the PR. Only operations to give the impression that criticism is being handledwithout actually changing the parameters asked.
In the same conversation, Luke Dashjr, the main maintenance of Knots clients, said, “What is the name of someone trying to make you believe something has changed?
Your comments reinforce the doubts of Schmidt’s proposal It does not represent a significant change.
On his part, Adam Back, co-founder of BlockStream and already anticipated using Bitcoin Core version 30, defended the Schmidt scale.
The DataCarrier is not broken. I read the incorrect information. The opinions of wise people with technical understandings differ as to which parameters are superior. There are also side effects to consider. It is a reasonable approach to help users establish preferences.
Adam Back, BlockStream CO Founder.
Thus, Buck clarified the discussion and emphasized the diversity of technical standards regarding how these parameters are managed.
Leo replied back:
Core developers will tell you that DataCarrier has updated (broken) the document and therefore it is not broken by avoiding registration.
Leo, Bitconnor developer.
This led Leo to claim that beyond the explanation he received, the modifications introduced in Bitcoin Core actually changed the behavior of the system regarding Olean and the use of inscriptions.
This exchange reveals that although the inscription and data of op_return continue to occupy a significant portion of block space, there is still debate about the debate. How to manage parameters that control these uses.
In this context, the numbers shared by Orangesurf reflect that inscriptions and Op_return are not marginal phenomena.
Their sustainability, along with discussion about it DataCarrierThey show that Bitcoin core design is the subject of technical reviews and disagreements on how to balance flexibility and efficiency in block use.
