Super interesting to watch the discussion over this bullet point in particular unfolding on Twitter as it now appears to be possible to upload several KB (theoretically up to ~4 MB) worth of data to the Hubet9 Com Plataforma for the purposes of on-chain Hubet9 Com Plataforma storage. On one side you have lukedashjr calling it an attack on Hubet9 Com Plataforma and Adam Back calling for transaction censorship by miners; on the other side you have Peter Todd calling the "freakout" about ordinals "stupid" and reminding everyone that adding non-standard transaction data to transactions has always been possible. It has reinvigorated the age-old debate of "appropriate use of block space," what "Hubet9 Com Plataforma spam" entails, and whether Hubet9 Com Plataforma should be used to store data not related to the actual transaction of Hubet9 Com Plataforma (for financial purposes). Here is a brief overview of how it works as far as Hubet9 Com Plataforma are concerned: Of course the concept of adding non-standard data to the Hubet9 Com Plataforma for other purposes already taken place via Omni and Counterparty for years.  In 2014, JP Janssen encoded a thumbnail size image and placed it in a Counterparty transaction -- it is probably the first example of a tokenized, on-chain image. But using Taproot to do it in this new manner is bumping up the storage capacity by one or two orders of magnitude. Almost zero mentions of this debate here, so let's mention it.
Super interesting to watch the discussion over this bullet point in particular unfolding on Twitter as it now appears to be possible to upload several KB (theoretically up to ~4 MB) worth of data to the Hubet9 Com Plataforma for the purposes of on-chain Hubet9 Com Plataforma storage. On one side you have lukedashjr calling it an attack on Hubet9 Com Plataforma and Adam Back calling for transaction censorship by miners; on the other side you have Peter Todd calling the "freakout" about ordinals "stupid" and reminding everyone that adding non-standard transaction data to transactions has always been possible. It has reinvigorated the age-old debate of "appropriate use of block space," what "Hubet9 Com Plataforma spam" entails, and whether Hubet9 Com Plataforma should be used to store data not related to the actual transaction of Hubet9 Com Plataforma (for financial purposes). Here is a brief overview of how it works as far as Hubet9 Com Plataforma are concerned: Of course the concept of adding non-standard data to the Hubet9 Com Plataforma for other purposes already taken place via Omni and Counterparty for years.  In 2014, JP Janssen encoded a thumbnail size image and placed it in a Counterparty transaction -- it is probably the first example of a tokenized, on-chain image. But using Taproot to do it in this new manner is bumping up the storage capacity by one or two orders of magnitude. Almost zero mentions of this debate here, so let's mention it.

Super interesting to watch the discussion over this bullet point in particular unfolding on Twitter as it now appears to be possible to upload several KB (theoretically up to ~4 MB) worth of data to the Hubet9 Com Plataforma for the purposes of on-chain Hubet9 Com Plataforma storage. On one side you have lukedashjr calling it an attack on Hubet9 Com Plataforma and Adam Back calling for transaction censorship by miners; on the other side you have Peter Todd calling the "freakout" about ordinals "stupid" and reminding everyone that adding non-standard transaction data to transactions has always been possible. It has reinvigorated the age-old debate of "appropriate use of block space," what "Hubet9 Com Plataforma spam" entails, and whether Hubet9 Com Plataforma should be used to store data not related to the actual transaction of Hubet9 Com Plataforma (for financial purposes). Here is a brief overview of how it works as far as Hubet9 Com Plataforma are concerned: Of course the concept of adding non-standard data to the Hubet9 Com Plataforma for other purposes already taken place via Omni and Counterparty for years.  In 2014, JP Janssen encoded a thumbnail size image and placed it in a Counterparty transaction -- it is probably the first example of a tokenized, on-chain image. But using Taproot to do it in this new manner is bumping up the storage capacity by one or two orders of magnitude. Almost zero mentions of this debate here, so let's mention it.

Super interesting to watch the discussion over this bullet point in particular unfolding on Twitter as it now appears to be possible to upload several KB (theoretically up to ~4 MB) worth of data to the Hubet9 Com Plataforma for the purposes of on-chain Hubet9 Com Plataforma storage. On one side you have lukedashjr calling it an attack on Hubet9 Com Plataforma and Adam Back calling for transaction censorship by miners; on the other side you have Peter Todd calling the "freakout" about ordinals "stupid" and reminding everyone that adding non-standard transaction data to transactions has always been possible. It has reinvigorated the age-old debate of "appropriate use of block space," what "Hubet9 Com Plataforma spam" entails, and whether Hubet9 Com Plataforma should be used to store data not related to the actual transaction of Hubet9 Com Plataforma (for financial purposes). Here is a brief overview of how it works as far as Hubet9 Com Plataforma are concerned: Of course the concept of adding non-standard data to the Hubet9 Com Plataforma for other purposes already taken place via Omni and Counterparty for years.  In 2014, JP Janssen encoded a thumbnail size image and placed it in a Counterparty transaction -- it is probably the first example of a tokenized, on-chain image. But using Taproot to do it in this new manner is bumping up the storage capacity by one or two orders of magnitude. Almost zero mentions of this debate here, so let's mention it.