Nick Szabo Weighs In as Contentious BTC Core Update Approaches Release

As the release date for the update gets closer, the BTC community is at a critical crossroads. Nick Szabo, a well-known cypherpunk and thought leader, made a stunning comeback to X (previously Twitter) later than five years, adding to the weight of concerns about what considerable modifications to the BTC protocol would mean.

Significant Changes in BTC Core v30

BTC Core v30 has a lot of new features, such as a new command system and a complete of the wallet infrastructure. The projected increase in the OP_RETURN opcode’s data limit is at the center of the debate. 

OP_RETURN allowed 80 bytes, but now it can allow up to over 4 gigabytes per transaction output. This dramatically increases the amount of non-monetary data that can be stored in the BTC blockchain.

The Main Debate: Purists vs. Maximalists

This improvement makes it evident that there is a large difference in ideas. BTC purists say that the should only be used for money transactions. They say that more people using OP_RETURN could cause the blockchain to get too large, make network nodes more expensive to run, and make it easier for spam or poor data to get through. 

On the other hand, maximalists say that users should be able to use the transaction space however they want as long as they pay the fees. They believe that market forces will naturally reduce destructive behavior by making transactions more expensive.

Nick Szabo’s Worries: Risks in the Law and Technology

return to the public eye shows how node operators face both legal and technological difficultys. He says that while transaction fees work well as a spam filter for miners, they don’t do a excellent job of protecting full nodes, which have to keep all blockchain data, even if it is or dangerous. 

Szabo says that increasing the OP_RETURN allowance could make node operators more likely to get in trouble with the law, since making illegal content easier to find in standard formats makes it more likely to be looked at by the law.

Szabo cites court cases that say operators aren’t responsible if they don’t know about or have control over the stuff they store. He does say, though, that data that is simple to view is more dangerous than material that is hidden or broken up. This tension is still not resolved, which means that operators are still at risk of changing legal interpretations.