[bitcoin-dev] Claiming an OP_RETURN Prefix

[Peter Todd]

On August 15, 2018 8:33:43 PM UTC, "Jorge Timón via bitcoin-dev" <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>op_return outputs can be pruned because they are not spendable.
>putting a hash on in the witness script data won't make things better
>(it would actually make them worse) and it definitely doesn't help
>"block size bloat".
>I think I'm missing some context, but if you're using op_return purely
>for timestamping I would recommend using pay 2 contract  instead.

If you're *actually* just doing timestamping you're better off using OpenTimestamps. But many times people think they're just doing timestamping in reality mere timestamps are insufficient for the task.

Notably, this is something the Satoshi Bitcoin white paper gets wrong, incorrectly describing Bitcoin as a timestamping system: timestamping is insufficient to prevent double-spends.

-- 
https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org