关于比特币铭文 你需要知道的 10 个小知识

There is a little knowledge from the author's source to share with you. If the client refuses the transaction containing the inscription after the upgrade, what can the inscription still be used? If it is the client's turn to block, the inscription transaction will not be used and the client will not be able to chain it. What is the software for the blockchain that needs to undertake the three functions of storing account books, mining and wallet? One is the client, because the blockchain is open. Theoretically, anyone can develop the client as long as it meets the consensus of this chain, so there can be various clients, for example, and if it is really followed up that it is forbidden to trade inscriptions, then whether the inscriptions can't be traded completely or not is also because the clients have to be subdivided. Many people are using the old version, and there is a used version among the users of the client, so even if the rules prohibiting the abuse of blockchain space are added to the version, The old version can still be used normally, so as long as you wait patiently until it is the turn of the old version to get out of the block, the inscription can still be used, that is, for example, it can be wound up in minutes now, and it will take minutes in the future. Of course, miners tend to upgrade to the latest version. If everyone upgrades slowly, the usability of the inscription will become very poor. If it is decided that the forking chain will succeed, it is technically very simple to copy the code and even does not need to be changed. It is difficult to use consensus because of the support of the old version. What is consensus? The Miners' Exchange even agrees that a pie containing cookies is a real pie. It's almost impossible. I must fork so much. Does it make sense? Yes, but it's limited. I'm proud of the security guaranteed by strong computing power. If there is a new chain, it's not as secure as Bitcoin, and it can issue all kinds of digital cultural relics. Wait, then why not use the chain and really use the loophole to use the blockchain? Yes, but the word exploitation of loophole is a bit too much. I think it's at best to bypass the restriction. After all, subjectively speaking. The word "not taking advantage of loopholes" is generally used to describe hackers, but objectively it does cause a waste of bitcoin block space. Really? What is the engraving process? How to get around it? The inscription is to choose a smart one, that is, to dye it, and then use this new technology to make comments on this smart bitcoin in the form of a text script. For example, the remarks protocol is the format and the content. If you insist on metaphor, it is about the result of transfer. Now I will transfer it to you every time. The two of us have to chat through the notes on the red envelope. It is hard to say that it is a loophole, but it is probably an abuse of normal, which is not supported. However, it is realized in disguise through this form of transfer notes. At the same time, it bypasses the original upper limit of notes and makes it reach the maximum from a few bytes. It is different to insert a note and a smart contract. You should know that a smart contract is to sign a contract and a note is a note, and the two effects are not the same. This is also an Ethernet system and an inscription. One of the differences is that if I transfer money to you with a smart contract, it is the kind that the real transfer can't be denied. If I transfer money to you with a note, for example, this inscription belongs to me now. I just wrote it in the note. Now with this agreement, the ruling thinks that this note is effective and it is regarded as the inscription that I transferred money to you successfully. Really, there is no difference between the two. Many data are stored under the chain, but the inscription is all in the chain. Of course, this is also a headache. The advantage is that the income of miners has increased. Perhaps it is the miners' important income after halving the number of times. The disadvantage is that the account book is enlarged. After all, a lot of extra contents are stuffed in the way of bypassing the restrictions, which is not conducive to the storage account book of all nodes. The larger the size of the account book, the less the number of nodes. The blockchain is more like the alliance chain. How much account book volume is really important? In recent years, I have been aware of this problem and have been discussing how to cut down some historical status or even historical account books. Because of the use of community blocks, the account book volume has been better. It's not too big, so there are a lot of decentralized inscriptions on the whole node. Maybe it's a good idea to actively limit the transaction volume, and then cut off some new technologies on the current basis. The original intention is to enable some basic scripting functions to be used to bypass the maximum remarks, but it's not a good idea to stuff too many things into Bitcoin in a bypassing way. After all, it's a hundred times worse from a few bytes to hundreds of bytes, but if we make a slight restriction and grasp a scale without causing a tragedy of the commons, I believe that the core community will not be too disgusted with such digital artifacts. 比特币今日价格行情网_okx交易所app_永续合约_比特币怎么买卖交易_虚拟币交易所平台

注册有任何问题请添加 微信：MVIP619 拉你进入群

文章转载注明 网址：https://netpsp.com/?id=62585