Bitcoin infighting erupts: Jimmy Song harshly criticizes core developers, the OP_Return dispute may trigger a new fork.

Bitcoin developer and advocate Jimmy Song recently launched a fierce attack on the Bitcoin Core development team, accusing them of embodying a “statutory” mentality with their decision to remove the OP_Return limit in the upcoming Bitcoin Core 30 upgrade. This debate has continued for nearly six months, reminiscent of the block size debate between 2015 and 2017, and has led to a record number of node operators turning to alternative implementations like Bitcoin Knots, raising community concerns about a potential new fork.

Jimmy Song harshly criticized: “The non-monetary use of Bitcoin is just spam”

(Source: Github)

Song accused the core developers of ignoring the strong opposition from the Bitcoin community and node operators regarding the removal of the OP_Return limit (currently 80 bytes), and shifting users' concerns. He stated bluntly in the comments: “Spam is hard to define, and because of this ambiguity, we shouldn't make any distinctions in the software; it's a waste of time on a legal political argument where you pretend not to see the obvious, so the actual debate can never begin — the non-monetary use of Bitcoin is just spam.”

He further emphasized: “You can argue whether this is a desirable thing, but to say you cannot define it is a delaying tactic aimed at avoiding a real debate about the actual effects—especially the long-term effects of such changes.”

Despite the pull request to remove the OP_Return limit being very unpopular in the Bitcoin community, it was ultimately approved by the core development team, leading to serious divisions within the community.

Node Runners “Vote with Their Feet”: Bitcoin Knots Usage Hits All-Time High

Bitcoin core developers decided to unilaterally lift the OP_Return data restriction, which led to a split in the Bitcoin community and drove a record number of Bitcoin node operators to switch to Bitcoin Knots (another implementation of Bitcoin node software).

The number of nodes running Bitcoin Knots has surged, currently accounting for about 20% of the network, while in 2024 this ratio was about 1%, which represents an almost vertical leap in just 9 months.

Knots allows node operators to enforce strict data size limits, and supporters believe this is necessary for maintaining the decentralization of the Bitcoin protocol.

The Importance of Decentralization and Data Restrictions

Due to the simple architecture and strict data limitations of Bitcoin, the Bitcoin ledger has generated approximately 680 GB of data since the birth of the decentralized protocol in 2009.

The low data storage requirements of Bitcoin allow anyone to run a node on retail computer hardware for as low as $300, thereby achieving democratization of access and ensuring maximum decentralization.

In contrast, blockchain networks and smart contract platforms with higher throughput can generate more data, but operational costs can reach tens of thousands of dollars and require specialized commercial hardware, which means that only wealthy investors and large companies can run nodes and execute the consensus rules of these agreements.

The powerful hardware requirements mean an increased degree of centralization of blockchain protocols, as well as an increased risk of a few nodes colluding to change consensus rules or reverse transactions.

The Controversy of OP_Return and the Historical Echoes of the Bitcoin Cash Fork

The debate over OP_Return reminds people of the Bitcoin block size war that occurred between 2015 and 2017, which ultimately led to a hard fork of the Bitcoin protocol, giving rise to Bitcoin Cash, and resulted in a split within the Bitcoin community.

Nowadays, with node operators massively shifting to Bitcoin Knots, and the increasing skepticism within the community regarding the decision-making process of the Bitcoin Core development team, many are beginning to speculate whether the OP_Return war will lead to a similar fork.

The core of this debate is not only about technical details, but also involves the fundamental philosophy of Bitcoin: is it a pure digital currency, or should it accommodate a broader range of non-monetary uses? As the price of Bitcoin surpasses 114,000 USD, the outcome of this internal debate could have profound effects on the market.