Create account

replied 1659d
The current system can be effortlessly ported to bigger OP_RETURNs. Anything else is a stopgap. IPFS is good though because it has no limits and could be used for video, etc.
replied 1659d
I see where you're coming from, I just meant that it could continue to be useful post-upgrade if the bigger OP_RETURNs are still inadequate for some users. I agree on IPFS for storage
replied 1655d
I also like having the IPFS option also. If you want to explain something in length or post a big article/research/book.
replied 1659d
But having the stopgap could drive more use in this case, and maybe drive the devs to lift the 25 txs per block limit or the OP_RETURN limit if they see the demand for it
replied 1659d
I'm looking at merging replies together at the moment on Member. It is clunky, as Jason says, but the miners don't seem to be moving on the OP_RET size.
replied 1655d
If the platform generates many smaller UTXOs instead of one big one, the 25 tx/block limit wouldn't hurt that much as it's per UTXO. That combined with chained transactions ...
replied 1655d
Looks pretty good. This is a single comment on Member and looks like a heart:

⁣☁️☁️☁️☁️☁️☁️☁️
☁️💗💗☁️💗💗☁️
☁️💗💗💗💗
replied 1655d
☁⁣️
☁️💗💗💗💗💗☁⁣️
☁️☁️💗💗💗☁️☁️
☁️☁️☁️💗☁️☁️☁️
☁️☁️☁️☁️☁️☁️☁️
replied 1655d
... would do it IMO!
@FreeTrade I heard you've managed to do it on the Member app. I'll be giving it a try!
replied 1659d
Ya, chaining txs could be useful for awhile. Memo has been running into the 25 tx limit for over a year, hopefully it will be lifted soon but not relying on it.