Would OP_SUCCESS (OP_CAT) be spent?

The discussion revolves around the challenges and potential solutions related to scaling in the context of mining pools and their implementation of proposals, particularly focusing on the adequacy of current signaling mechanisms for soft-forks or changes in blockchain protocols. The primary concern highlighted is the limitation in the existing signaling mechanism for activating changes, which relies on miners flipping bits—a method that can be ambiguous due to its common use for other purposes in Proof of Work (PoW) systems. An improvement suggested involves adopting a more explicit signaling mechanism, such as specifying the Bitcoin Improvement Proposal (BIP) number along with an OP_SUCCESS code, to make it clear when there is increasing support for restricting certain behaviors, like the use of specific opcodes that miners might choose to avoid.

Further issues discussed include the risks of Denial of Service (DoS) attacks that could arise if a proposal is updated after initial agreement, suggesting that signaling could again provide a solution. By committing to a precise release or implementation prefix, miners and networks could mitigate the exploitation of semantic changes. The conversation also delves into the incentives for miners to adhere to proposals that limit transaction types they can mine. Even though all transactions are valid within the consensus rules, and thus not implementing a proposal wouldn't directly lead to block rejection, there's an argument that with clear enough signaling, miners could make informed choices about the risks they are willing to take.

The email touches on the broader implications of these issues for the future of soft-forks and the overall process of upgrading blockchain protocols. The sender expresses a desire for clearer signaling methods to facilitate safer upgrades and reflects on the current state of miner engagement with signaling processes. They speculate whether the lack of clear signaling is due to a perception that no upgrades are worth the effort or if there are deeper issues with the upgrade process that need to be addressed. The overarching theme is a call for better communication and mechanisms between miners and developers to ensure smooth transitions and implementations of necessary changes to the blockchain protocol, hoping for the realization of efficient soft-forks in the near future.