Yesterday (22), the Bitcoin Core development team officially confirmed that the 30.0 version will remove the 80-byte limit on the OP_Return opcode. Bitcoin developer and advocate Jimmy Song strongly criticized Bitcoin Core for this move, calling it fundamentally a "fiat mentality."

The development team ignores the voices from the Bitcoin community and node operators

OPReturn is a special output format in Bitcoin transactions that allows a small amount of data to be written to the blockchain, primarily used for storing small amounts of information on the Bitcoin blockchain without affecting its functionality. However, unlike regular transaction outputs, OPReturn outputs cannot be spent and do not add to the burden of the unspent transaction outputs (UTXOs) set.

It can be said that OP_Return allows Bitcoin to be used not only as a currency but also as a tool for data storage and verification, while also providing a foundation for the development of other assets and applications, such as during the Ordinals inscription craze in early 2024.

OP_Return was proposed by the Bitcoin developer community in 2014, with the initial design purpose being to allow transactions to safely carry "a small amount of data" written into the blockchain, with a typical limit of 40 bytes, later increased to 80 bytes in v0.11. The original intention of designing this feature was to give users the opportunity to leave a short message on the Bitcoin chain (such as proof of ownership, digital file hashes, copyright statements, evidence of artwork, etc.), while avoiding "non-monetary uses" occupying UTXO space, thus keeping the ledger clean.

The decision to remove the OPReturn opcode has led Jimmy Song to accuse Core developers of evading user concerns about the cancellation of the OPReturn limit (currently 80 bytes) and ignoring the strong opposition from the Bitcoin community and node operators.

Many opponents worry that if non-financial data floods in, the blockchain size will accelerate its expansion, raising hardware costs and undermining the foundation of "anyone can run a node."

Song stated, "The idea that garbage information is difficult to define, and therefore no distinction is made in software design, is a waste of time's 'political' sophistry. The non-monetary uses of Bitcoin are just garbage information."

The debate over OPReturn has lasted nearly six months, inevitably reminding the market of the Bitcoin block size dispute from 2015 to 2017, which ultimately led to a hard fork of the Bitcoin protocol and the birth of Bitcoin Cash (BCH). This has led some members of the Bitcoin community to speculate whether the OPReturn dispute will also trigger a similar split.

2017 Community's long inability to reach consensus ultimately led to a hard fork

Between 2015 and 2017, the Bitcoin community engaged in intense debates over the block size limit (1MB), splitting into the "big block" camp and the "small block" camp. The former hoped to modify the original Bitcoin protocol to increase block capacity to handle more transactions, arguing that cheaper and faster transactions would make Bitcoin more scalable.

The latter wanted to maintain the 1 MB size limit (which Satoshi Nakamoto originally set for each block and never publicly explained why the 1MB block size limit was added), prioritizing the fundamental principles of Bitcoin's security and decentralization. They believed that increasing the block size would raise the cost for ordinary users to run Bitcoin nodes, leading to enterprises hosting nodes in data centers, thus harming the network's decentralization.

After a long-standing disagreement that could not reach consensus, it ultimately led to a hard fork. On August 1, 2017, the camp supporting block expansion created a new chain, Bitcoin Cash, raising the block limit to 8MB, which was later further expanded to 32MB. BTC (Bitcoin) maintained the original 1MB block limit, shifting towards a "digital gold" role and value storage positioning; BCH focused on "payment applications" and high-speed, low-fee daily transaction scenarios.

This established two major routes: BTC as digital gold (high security, value storage) and BCH as a circulating currency (fast, low fees), directly influencing subsequent Bitcoin governance, protocol disputes, and other fork discussions.

The exodus of the opposition, turning to Bitcoin Knots

Currently, many node operators are turning to Bitcoin Knots, which continues the existing data restrictions. According to Coin Dance data, the proportion of nodes using Bitcoin Knots surged from about 1% in 2024 to 20%, showing vertical growth in just nine months. Knots allows node operators to enforce strict data size limits, and supporters believe this is necessary to maintain the decentralization of the Bitcoin protocol.

Since the establishment of the decentralized protocol in 2009, the Bitcoin ledger has generated about 680 GB of data, thanks to Bitcoin's simple architecture and strict data limits. Bitcoin's lower data storage requirements allow anyone to synchronize about 680 GB of complete chain data with approximately $300 of retail hardware, greatly achieving democratized participation and maximum decentralization.

This time, node operators are taking practical action to resist, making a large-scale shift to Bitcoin Knots, sparking a historic wave of exodus.

Developers supporting the removal of the OPReturn limit argue that the existing 80-byte limit is merely an artificially set threshold, and there are already various ways to bypass it, such as using the Taproot and Ordinals technologies in Bitcoin protocol upgrades to split data and embed it in different parts of transactions, breaking through the single OPReturn size limit. If the data carrying capacity can be increased, it could also stimulate more innovative applications, thus supporting the sustainable development of the network.

The debate over the OP_Return limit highlights the Bitcoin community's challenge in balancing on-chain data storage space with decentralization principles. As technology evolves and use cases diversify, the 80-byte limit can no longer effectively reflect real needs. Removing this limit means that the Bitcoin ecosystem will enter a more open and inclusive stage, helping to foster more innovative applications and providing new revenue incentives for miners.

However, this also brings risks of network expansion and decentralization pressure, forcing the community to re-examine how to find a balance between expansion and protecting core values.

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。