So in reality you are just creating UTXO bloat by spamming bitcoin blockchain with unspendable transactions and creating pointless burden for full nodes that have to load those UTXOs...
no, they are all valid transactions to users who just haven't been born yet. they are tiny gifts to the future that could eventually be spent. perhaps
when we have moon bases on io or when mars has breathable air again.
Translation to normal English: never.
Pooya is right on this one: These UTXOs will remain forever in the UTXO set which full nodes to have to maintain actively, so its size is artificially increased by people doing these types of experiments. Since you are still an extremely tiny minority, we don't see 'bad effects' of it yet, but if the idea catches on, I do see how this can eventually become an attack on Bitcoin.
You can find it in
.bitcoin/chainstate.
https://statoshi.info:3000/d/000000009/unspent-transaction-output-set?orgId=1&viewPanel=8&refresh=10mIf we have a look, it's currently almost 5GB, but since we know that e.g. this project exists, it can never ever go down close to zero again, but will have a certain 'base' defined by the coins sent to addresses for which private keys are lost or never existed (such as in this application). Mathematically, they do exist, but you and I know these coins will never be spent.
apertus.io transactions are not pointless spam, they are memories of loved ones, art, a historical record of humanities failures, hopes, fears and triumphs
on permissionless blockchains every person can and will decided for themselves how to allocate their own funds. what i have placed under bitcoin's protection will exist long after all of us are dead.
It depends on how you define pointless spam. If you think of Bitcoin as a payment system, you could argue they are. Similarly to someone starting to write down large chunks of information on bank notes; it's not their primary purpose, but it does work if you split the data across enough bank notes. However, it can reduce the usability of the system, hence they will be replaced by the bank sooner or later. This is not possible in Bitcoin, though.
So if you were to upload a 5GB movie through this method, which according to you wouldn't even be very expensive (roughly $50,000), you could effectively double the UTXO set size. If someone were to splurge $5M on such an attack, the chainstate would increase not by 5GB but by 500GB and become too large for most nodes to continue operation. Am I missing something? Seems like a very powerful attack to me.
it has been awhile since i checked.
