Hello
@bitcoincoreorg,
We live Bitcoin. We dedicate our lives to it, full time, nonstop. On the ground, we work as part of Bitcoin’s invisible team, often without salaries, simply because we believe in its power to fix money and defend society from injustice and authoritarianism.
Bitcoin is beautiful. But it can also become fragile, outdated, or even corrupted, if we do not care for it with the seriousness it deserves.
The white paper begins with the words:
“Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System.”
Not a decentralized database. That distinction matters.
Developers must lower their time preference and think in terms of centuries, not release cycles. Bitcoin is a cash system designed for global adoption in commerce. That was Satoshi’s vision.
Originally, in 2014 Bitcoin Core introduced OP_RETURN with a 40-byte limit. In 2015 this was raised to 80 bytes, and in 2016 clarified as an 83-byte script length. For nearly a decade the rule stayed unchanged. Then, in 2024 with Core v29, the policy was relaxed to allow multiple OP_RETURN outputs per transaction, although each remained capped at 80 bytes. Now, with Core v30 (2025), the long-standing cap itself has been removed entirely: OP_RETURN outputs are no longer bound to 80 bytes, and multiple OP_RETURNs per transaction are allowed, bounded only by general transaction-weight (~100,000 vbytes) and block-weight (4 MB) limits.
This is extremely risky. By first allowing multiple OP_RETURNs (v29) and now eliminating the explicit size cap (v30), Core normalizes and facilitates behavior that was once discouraged. It opens the door to spam, bloat, and malicious use cases. It allows attackers to inject unwanted or even illegal content directly on-chain, potentially exposing node operators to liability. Users should have the freedom to filter what they host, but Core should not encourage practices that turn Bitcoin into a data-storage network.
Yes, arbitrary data can already be forced onto the blockchain in different ways. But these policy changes transform a fringe misuse into a legitimized practice, encouraging precisely the kind of abuse that poses systemic risks. A public-opinion crisis, triggered by toxic or illegal content, could cause catastrophic damage to adoption and market confidence.
Bitcoin is money. Just as you can scribble a short note on a banknote but not publish a book on it, Bitcoin transactions can carry limited messages but should not be hijacked for unrelated purposes.
If protocol development drifts toward use cases that weaken Bitcoin as cash, the consequences will be severe. The network is already signaling concern: voices like
@BitcoinKnots resonate because Bitcoiners are smart, technical, and willing to act when needed to protect the network.
We have already built important advancements to secure Bitcoin’s long-term future. Let us not undo this progress. Let us stay true to the vision: Bitcoin as a peer-to-peer electronic cash system.