Author: ChandlerZ, Foresight News
Recently, the Bitcoin Core project released a joint statement on the "Bitcoin Core Development and Transaction Relay Strategy" on its official forum, proposing that non-financial uses on the Bitcoin network should not be restricted, and miners and nodes should not refuse to relay and package such transactions. The statement conveys a reaffirmation of the Bitcoin network's anti-censorship and protocol neutrality principles. However, in the current ecological context, this statement has also triggered extensive discussions among developers and the community.
Since the inscription mechanism triggered a boom in 2023, on-chain resource usage, network congestion, and disputes over discourse power have become core issues in the Bitcoin ecosystem. The subsequent BRC20 protocol has promoted the diversification of asset forms and further highlighted the differences surrounding non-financial applications. The release of this statement has reactivated the debate on the boundaries of Bitcoin network usage. Whether Bitcoin will continue to expand the non-native application space in the future will depend on deeper coordination and consensus between developers and users.
What signal does the Bitcoin Core statement send?
It is not difficult to see that the statement is essentially a formal response to the controversy surrounding Ordinals, inscription transactions, and data traffic for non-financial purposes. The statement clearly states that the Bitcoin network should adhere to the principles of decentralization and anti-censorship, the core development team has no right to prevent users from using on-chain space for non-financial purposes, and node operators and miners should not selectively relay or package transactions based on subjective judgment. This position essentially expresses a "technical neutrality" attitude towards inscriptions and other on-chain data applications.
From the background of the statement, the Bitcoin Core team's move was not a sudden turn, but a continuation of its consistent position on relay policy for several years: the responsibility of the node software is to ensure the neutrality and reliability of network operation to the greatest extent, rather than making qualitative judgments on transaction purposes. Previously, the controversy surrounding the data expansion of inscriptions, network congestion, and high handling fees formed sharply opposing opinions within the community. This statement attempts to ease the long-standing disagreement between developers and node operators by strengthening consensus neutrality without interfering with transaction types.
However, once the statement was released, it quickly triggered a strong response at the community level. Many developers and industry figures expressed varying degrees of dissatisfaction and even doubts. Jameson Lopp, co-founder of Casa Wallet, believes that Bitcoin Core developers are not a unified entity, but speaking out in a joint statement, which is suspected of losing the governance transparency that centralized projects should have; Samson Mow, CEO of JAN3, also pointed out that the statement of "this is the case now" conceals the fact that developers gradually allow the network structure to be changed. Luke Dashjr, a well-known developer from Bitcoin Core, was more outspoken in criticizing the improper design of the relay target of the statement, believing that the lack of clarity in the definition of "which transactions should be forwarded" will lead to a more chaotic relay mechanism.
Behind the disagreement, it actually reveals the fundamental disagreement on "network positioning" within the current Bitcoin ecosystem. Developers represented by Carl Horton believe that Bitcoin should focus on its functional positioning as a "peer-to-peer electronic cash system" rather than being used as a general data storage carrier. This is in obvious conflict with practical paths such as inscriptions and BRC20. Although the current statement does not directly support such non-financial transactions, its "non-intervention" attitude has been widely interpreted by the market as an implicit relaxation of on-chain expansion applications.
In the short term, this statement may reduce the behavior of miners or nodes to exclude inscription transactions out of subjective will, which will help restore the network's inclusiveness of Ordinals. However, in the medium and long term, its path selection for the entire Bitcoin ecosystem and its redefinition of the relationship between developers and users remain to be seen. The game between the core development team and other entities in the community may be far from over.
Internal differences and technical bottlenecks in the Bitcoin ecosystem
Looking back on the development trajectory of the Bitcoin ecosystem in recent years, it can be seen that although it has made breakthroughs in innovation and exploration, the overall ecological construction still faces many structural problems.
There is a lack of consistent technical direction and consensus mechanism within the ecosystem, and there have been long-standing differences in the positions of core developers, miners, wallet service providers and user groups. Due to the limited native functions of the Bitcoin protocol, there has been no consensus on whether non-financial uses should be supported. This split is manifested in the low acceptance of new technologies and the slow advancement of protocol evolution in actual operation, which restricts the linkage and construction efficiency of the ecosystem.
Non-financial applications represented by inscriptions and BRC20 protocols have injected a certain amount of vitality into Bitcoin, but at the same time have also brought about problems such as increased resource consumption and increased node operation burden. Some miners and nodes selectively avoid such transactions, exacerbating the antagonism between network participants. This inconsistency in technology and position makes the entire ecosystem lack coordination and flexibility when dealing with emerging applications, and it is difficult for innovation to form a sustained effect.
The Bitcoin Core team’s statement that non-financial transactions should not be restricted or rejected is an attempt to intervene in this situation. From an ecological perspective, this statement is expected to break down some technical barriers and cognitive barriers, freeing up more space for the deployment of new projects and user participation. Once the core developers clearly oppose the position of technical review and promote the relay layer and packaging strategy to be more neutral, the development path around non-financial applications will gain more certainty. But this does not mean that the ecological problem has been fundamentally solved. On the contrary, whether the technological evolution can be truly implemented and whether the developer community can form an effective collaboration mechanism will still determine whether this statement can ultimately bring about a substantial change.
New gameplay, or the turning point of Bitcoin ecology
Some developers have reservations about the statement recently released by the Bitcoin Core project, but the statement clarifies the open position of the Bitcoin network for non-financial uses and provides a relatively relaxed policy environment for ecological innovation.
At present, the development of traditional projects in the Bitcoin ecosystem has slowed down, and the expansion of technology and applications faces certain restrictions. In this case, focusing on emerging projects that can seize the opportunity of this policy adjustment may have more room for growth. Although these innovations have brought some controversy, such as the impact on network load and stability, they also demonstrate the potential for diversified development of the Bitcoin network.
After all, what the Web3 ecosystem is best at is constantly trying and creating new things. Facing challenges and exploring new possibilities may be the direction of the future.
YouQuan
Joy
Brian
Hui Xin