I understood that BIP-110 goals to cut back node prices by limiting sure non-financial transaction patterns.
That’s the alleged objective, 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 objective: knowledge storage bytes are concerning the most cost-effective when it comes to precise processing impression, as they don’t comprise signature checks or different costly opcodes, and don’t work together with the UTXO set. Outlawing them might effectively find yourself inflicting them to get replaced with per-byte extra impactful transactions. Or after all, those that have demand for knowledge storage might change to completely 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 answer is introducing a unique or decrease block-wide useful resource restrict.
There isn’t a goal cause to outlaw these patterns; they’re merely not objectively dangerous to nodes. It’s completely honest to dislike them, as they’re an indication of inadequate competitors for block house from funds. However outlawing them for that cause is addressing the symptom, not the trigger.
If inexpensive full nodes are important for decentralization, why is transaction neutrality thought of the extra vital precept?
They completely are, however I don’t see any proof that the present limits are inadequate for conserving full nodes inexpensive, and see even much less cause why BIP-110 would have any constructive impression on that.
With that, there appears completely no cause to throw out the primary worth proposition Bitcoin supplies over actually each different foreign money: 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 momentary, I can’t see the way it can realistically declare to care about censorship resistance anymore.
