I understood that BIP-110 goals to cut back node prices by limiting sure non-financial transaction patterns.
That’s the alleged purpose, however it’s nonsense. Outlawing sure transaction patterns simply means the identical house is taken up by different transactions that pay decrease charges.
Arguably, it’s even counter to the said purpose: information storage bytes are concerning the least expensive when it comes to precise processing affect, as they don’t comprise signature checks or different costly opcodes, and don’t work together with the UTXO set. Outlawing them might properly find yourself inflicting them to get replaced with per-byte extra impactful transactions. Or after all, those that have demand for information storage might swap to totally different patterns.
The certain on useful resource prices for node operators is the block weight restrict. That restrict has been the identical since SegWit activated in 2017. If one believes that restrict was too excessive, and nonetheless is just too excessive 9 years later, the one actual resolution is introducing a special or decrease block-wide useful resource restrict.
There isn’t any goal purpose to outlaw these patterns; they’re merely not objectively dangerous to nodes. It’s totally truthful to dislike them, as they’re an indication of inadequate competitors for block house from funds. However outlawing them for that purpose is addressing the symptom, not the trigger.
If inexpensive full nodes are important for decentralization, why is transaction neutrality thought-about the extra necessary precept?
They completely are, however I don’t see any proof that the present limits are inadequate for retaining full nodes inexpensive, and see even much less purpose why BIP-110 would have any optimistic affect on that.
With that, there appears completely no purpose to throw out the primary worth proposition Bitcoin offers over actually each different forex: censorship-resistant cash. If the Bitcoin ecosystem can find yourself agreeing to outlaw such an arbitrary subset of disliked transactions, and even demonstrating the arbitrariness by making it short-term, I can’t see the way it can realistically declare to care about censorship resistance anymore.
