OP_Return辩论：BTC的脚本语言升级

最近几周，一场OP_Return的辩论在比特币行业爆发，现在已经入侵了该行业中的大多数对话空间。

A debate over OP_RETURN and mempool policy has been flaring up in the Bitcoin industry in recent weeks and has by now invaded most conversation spaces within the industry. The topic is rich and complex, and many people have strong opinions on the matter.

最近几周，关于比特币行业的OP_Return和Mempool政策的辩论一直在爆发，现在已经入侵了该行业中的大多数对话空间。这个话题是丰富而复杂的，许多人对此事有强烈的看法。

For those who missed it, OP_RETURN is an opcode in Bitcoin's scripting language used to store meta data or arbitrary data that is not relevant for bitcoin transaction validation, as such can be pruned by node runners without much issue, enabling more efficient management of spam while also giving developers a controlled environment to anchor data on chain.

对于那些错过了它的人，OP_Return是比特币的脚本语言中的OPCODE，用于存储与比特币交易验证无关的元数据或任意数据，因此可以由节点跑步者毫无疑问地修剪，从而使垃圾邮件更有效地管理垃圾邮件，同时还可以使开发人员在链中锚定一个受控的环境。

Taking a harm reduction approach to the problem of spam, the OP_RETURN controversy was recently triggered by a pull request submitted by Peter Todd to the Bitcoin Core repository. The pull request removed the 80-byte mempool policy limit on OP_RETURN payloads, which in practice limited the size of arbitrary data that could be placed in the script to about 80 bytes. By removing this limit, the maximum size of an OP_RETURN payload is limited only by the consensus block size cap of 1MB of non-SegWit data.

对垃圾邮件问题的危害减少方法，OP_Return争议最近是由Peter Todd提交给比特币核心存储库的拉力请求引发的。拉动请求删除了OP_Return有效载荷的80字节MEMPOOL策略限制，实际上，该载荷限制了可以将脚本中放置的任意数据的大小限制为约80字节。通过删除此限制，OP_Return有效载荷的最大大小仅受1MB非隔离数据的共识块大小上限的限制。

Proponents of the update, such as Todd, argue that the limit is no longer effective at stopping spam and, on the contrary, is leading to more harmful behaviors such as stuffing data in UTXOs, which harm node runners.

更新的支持者（例如托德）认为，极限不再有效地停止垃圾邮件，相反，限制会导致更有害的行为，例如在UTXOS中填充数据，这会伤害节点跑步者。

The proposal also removed the datacarrier flag, a configuration option that allowed node runners to choose which transactions to filter from their local mempool based on how much arbitrary data the OP_RETURN carried.

该提案还删除了DataCarrier标志，这是一种配置选项，允许节点跑步者根据OP_Return携带多少任意数据选择哪些交易来过滤其本地Mempool。

The opposition, led by Luke Dashjr, not only wants to keep the OP_RETURN limit in place and retain the datacarrier size but proposes further mempool policy restrictions on arbitrary data and “non-monetary” transactions on Bitcoin.

反对派由卢克·达什（Luke Dashjr）领导，不仅希望将OP_Return限制保持在适当的位置并保留DataCarrier的大小，而且还提出了对任意数据和比特币“非货币”交易的进一步限制。

Both camps generally agree that arbitrary data on Bitcoin is a bad thing for the network. They also agree that filters cannot possibly filter all kinds of spam. What they disagree on is how effective these kinds of filters are in mitigating spam. They also disagree on the consequences of imposing or removing these filters from the network, their impact on the costs of running a node, and their impact on mining centralization.

两个营地通常都同意，对比特币的任意数据对网络来说是一件坏事。他们还同意过滤器不可能过滤所有类型的垃圾邮件。他们不同意的是这些过滤器在缓解垃圾邮件中的有效性。他们还不同意将这些过滤器从网络中施加或删除这些过滤器的后果，对运行节点成本的影响以及对采矿集中化的影响。

Of course, not all proponents of the OP_RETURN changes agree with all of the arguments in favor of the pull request, and not all opponents agree with all of the arguments against it. This is just a general (and probably incomplete) overview of the various arguments out there.

当然，并非所有的支持者的支持者都与所有有利于拉的请求的论点一致，并且并非所有对手都同意反对它的所有论点。这只是其中各种参数的一般概述（可能是不完整的）。

In Support Of Removing the OP_RETURN Size Limit

支持删除OP_RET_RETTRUNT尺寸限制

Spearheaded by Peter Todd, though supported by many Bitcoin Core contributors, the removal of the OP_RETURN limit represents a harm reduction approach to the problem of spam and arbitrary data on Bitcoin.

彼得·托德（Peter Todd）的率领虽然得到了许多比特币核心贡献者的支持，但OP_Return限制的去除代表了对垃圾邮件问题的危害减少方法和对比特币的任意数据。

Todd argues that the current OP_RETURN limit, initially placed over a decade ago to give spammers a safe and controlled space for arbitrary data, no longer serves its purpose as companies and enthusiasts have developed direct-to-miner private mempools, such as MARA's Slipstream, that bypass mempool policy.

托德（Todd）认为，目前的OP_Return限制最初是在十年前放置的，以使垃圾邮件发送者为任意数据提供一个安全，受控的空间，因为公司和发烧友已经开发了直接到米纳的私人孟买（例如Mara's Slipstream）的目的，例如绕过Mara的Slipstream，绕过了绕过Mempool政策。

The OP_RETURN limit was put in place after Satoshi Nakamoto left, to protect the network from similar spam but during a very different era, when blocks were rarely full, much less boasting a high-fee environment. There were also few to no tools for pruning, and the software was very inefficient. Many optimisations have been implemented in the last decade, and their cumulative effects influence this debate.

在萨托·纳卡本（Satoshi Nakamoto）离开后，将OP_Return限制置于适当的位置，以保护网络免受类似的垃圾邮件的侵害，但是在一个截然不同的时代，块很少满足，更不用说拥有高费的环境了。修剪的工具也很少，也没有工具，该软件效率很低。在过去的十年中，已经实施了许多优化，它们的累积影响影响了这一辩论。

The OP_RETURN limit was thus more effective when it was first created and more difficult to bypass. Today, NFT and arbitrary data enthusiasts with ambitious projects, pressured out of the OP_RETURN space by the current mempool limit, have resorted to stuffing arbitrary data into the UTXO set instead. Unlike OP_RETURN or SegWit spaces, which can be reasonably pruned off nodes, the UTXO set is generally held in RAM, the most expensive form of memory. The UTXO set needs to be processed by nodes, to verify the supply of coins and be able to validate the integrity of new transactions, a fundamental piece of running a node, without which home nodes lose much of their value proposition. UTXO data stuffing as a result imposes significant costs on node runners by increasing initial block download, overall sync time, and hardware requirements that ultimately harm the decentralisation of the Bitcoin network.

因此，当它首次创建时，OP_Return限制更加有效，并且更难绕过。如今，NFT和任意数据爱好者拥有雄心勃勃的项目，而当前的MEMPOOL限制向OP_Return空间施加了压力，已求助于将任意数据塞入UTXO集中。与op_return或segwit空间可以合理地从节点上修剪，UTXO集通常以RAM保存，这是最昂贵的内存形式。 UTXO集需要由节点处理，以验证硬币的供应，并能够验证新事务的完整性，这是运行节点的基本段落，而没有该节点会失去其大部分价值主张。因此，UTXO数据填充通过增加初始块下载，整体同步时间和硬件要求，从而损害了比特币网络的分散化，从而对节点跑步者施加了巨大的成本。

Finally, supporters argue that miners are “rational economic actors,” an economics term meaning that to stay alive in a very competitive market, miners need to optimise for profits wherever possible. Thus, if mining consensus-valid non-standard transactions gives them an edge, they will take it.

最后，支持者认为矿工是“理性的经济行为者”，这是一个经济学术语，这意味着要在竞争激烈的市场中保持生命，矿工需要尽可能优化利润。因此，如果采矿共识 - 瓦利德非标准交易使它们具有优势，他们将接受它。

Back in 2023, Luke Dashjr proposed a change that sought to apply datacarrier mempool policy to SegWit and Taproot arbitrary data, such as Inscriptions, further restricting the options for spammers. Peter Todd opposed the PR, explaining that “The transactions targeted by this pull request are a very significant source of fee revenue for miners. It is very unlikely that miners will give up that source

早在2023年，卢克·达什（Luke Dashjr）提出了一个更改，试图将DataCarrier Mempool策略应用于Segwit和Taproot任意数据，例如铭文，进一步限制了垃圾邮件发送者的选项。彼得·托德（Peter Todd）反对PR，解释说：“此拉请求目标的交易是矿工的重要收入来源。矿工不太可能放弃该来源