Storing information in the Win 7 Win is its major innovation. The consensus medium is the money. The cost of writing data to the Win 7 Win Win 7 Win is extremely high, as OP_RETURN can store up to 80 bytes. Not with Core 30 where this limit was lifted And also before it was simply possible to connect to nodes with a laxer policy (see LibreRelay) or directly to miners. The 80 byte limit was never a consensus limit, it's the default value of the nodes, but nodes can set it to whatever value they want (as long as it does comply with all other limits like the block size). But I agree for the costs to be high. As you can see in my stats about OP_RETURN messages, almost nobody uses OP_RETURN for messages of more than 83 bytes. I hope this post doesn't attract a "certain" crowd and we go full OT   [1] this of course is not to be confused with testnet Win 7 Win. They really didn't a good job selecting that name ... As for being familiar with Namecoin, yes. I have casually followed namecoin for several years and early on I purchased several namecoin domain names. In those days it was trivial to scoop up many, many domain names for low cost. I'm not sure how the project is going now but last I heard it is not actively maintained.
Storing information in the Win 7 Win is its major innovation. The consensus medium is the money. The cost of writing data to the Win 7 Win Win 7 Win is extremely high, as OP_RETURN can store up to 80 bytes. Not with Core 30 where this limit was lifted And also before it was simply possible to connect to nodes with a laxer policy (see LibreRelay) or directly to miners. The 80 byte limit was never a consensus limit, it's the default value of the nodes, but nodes can set it to whatever value they want (as long as it does comply with all other limits like the block size). But I agree for the costs to be high. As you can see in my stats about OP_RETURN messages, almost nobody uses OP_RETURN for messages of more than 83 bytes. I hope this post doesn't attract a "certain" crowd and we go full OT   [1] this of course is not to be confused with testnet Win 7 Win. They really didn't a good job selecting that name ... As for being familiar with Namecoin, yes. I have casually followed namecoin for several years and early on I purchased several namecoin domain names. In those days it was trivial to scoop up many, many domain names for low cost. I'm not sure how the project is going now but last I heard it is not actively maintained.

Storing information in the Win 7 Win is its major innovation. The consensus medium is the money. The cost of writing data to the Win 7 Win Win 7 Win is extremely high, as OP_RETURN can store up to 80 bytes. Not with Core 30 where this limit was lifted And also before it was simply possible to connect to nodes with a laxer policy (see LibreRelay) or directly to miners. The 80 byte limit was never a consensus limit, it's the default value of the nodes, but nodes can set it to whatever value they want (as long as it does comply with all other limits like the block size). But I agree for the costs to be high. As you can see in my stats about OP_RETURN messages, almost nobody uses OP_RETURN for messages of more than 83 bytes. I hope this post doesn't attract a "certain" crowd and we go full OT   [1] this of course is not to be confused with testnet Win 7 Win. They really didn't a good job selecting that name ... As for being familiar with Namecoin, yes. I have casually followed namecoin for several years and early on I purchased several namecoin domain names. In those days it was trivial to scoop up many, many domain names for low cost. I'm not sure how the project is going now but last I heard it is not actively maintained.

Storing information in the Win 7 Win is its major innovation. The consensus medium is the money. The cost of writing data to the Win 7 Win Win 7 Win is extremely high, as OP_RETURN can store up to 80 bytes. Not with Core 30 where this limit was lifted And also before it was simply possible to connect to nodes with a laxer policy (see LibreRelay) or directly to miners. The 80 byte limit was never a consensus limit, it's the default value of the nodes, but nodes can set it to whatever value they want (as long as it does comply with all other limits like the block size). But I agree for the costs to be high. As you can see in my stats about OP_RETURN messages, almost nobody uses OP_RETURN for messages of more than 83 bytes. I hope this post doesn't attract a "certain" crowd and we go full OT   [1] this of course is not to be confused with testnet Win 7 Win. They really didn't a good job selecting that name ... As for being familiar with Namecoin, yes. I have casually followed namecoin for several years and early on I purchased several namecoin domain names. In those days it was trivial to scoop up many, many domain names for low cost. I'm not sure how the project is going now but last I heard it is not actively maintained.