Why BTC Devs are not working on a BIP to cap the number of UTXOs per TX?
961 sats \ 9 comments \ @rod 1 Jan bitcoin
Am I missing something?
If the number of UTXOs is limited to say, 10-20, that will make the ordinals business case challenging and reduce the fees for the day to day common transactions. Yet, the fees will continue to be high but only from CEX batch transactions and Ordinals, which won't affect the majority of he users.
@jimmysong, you are in stacker.news now (welcome by the way, very happy you are here) ,considering your technical acumen on the mater, perhaps you can give us your opinion?
write
preview
related posts
448 sats \ 0 replies \ @kristapsk 1 Jan
Number of inputs and outputs are already limited, as transaction maximum size is not infinite.
reply
399 sats \ 3 replies \ @WeAreAllSatoshi 1 Jan
Jimmy’s been stacking since 178
reply
291 sats \ 2 replies \ @SpaceHodler 1 Jan
Since block 178?
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @WeAreAllSatoshi 1 Jan
Item 178
You can see stackers' first item on their profile page.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @bataroot 1 Jan
just realized this 😀
reply
128 sats \ 1 reply \ @ek 1 Jan
Because it's usually more safe to not kill flies with shotguns
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Eobard 1 Jan
deleted by author
reply
32 sats \ 0 replies \ @theonevortex 1 Jan
If we cap the number of UTXOs then we cap the amount of people that can have their own private key in bitcoin.
OP_CTV actually allows for the ability to share UTXOs, scaling the amount of people that can hold their private keys several orders of magnitude.
As far as Ordinals goes, when fees reach a threshold deemed too high for the market it will calm down. The market clearly has decided fees aren't too high yet, patience.
Personally I spend my time researching tech that will allow more people to use bitcoin rather than worrying about short term flee fluctuations.
reply
16 sats \ 0 replies \ @piecover 1 Jan
No
reply