pull down to refresh

Thank you 😊 thats a great explanation 👍 im just observing the debate

When you put it like that, the larping may soon be limping!

Money talks

So would you say, the spam argument is a surface level offering to the bip, whereas there may be an ulterior motives hidden in plain sight?

My humble opinion is that people are just misled... There is no way to really stop 'spam' it is more or less an attack on the network that can take almost any format.

The only way to actually stop it is outbid it which is trivial to do at 1 sat/vbyte.

reply
4 sats \ 2 replies \ @Taj 1h

Yes, obviously i dont know all the terminology but there are many ways to skin a cat or should I say opcat lol

I'm with you in that if you pay the fee etc but as you say, with fees being so low there's a low barrier to entry

Would you say that bip110 is effectively choosing what you're 'allowed' to add to a block?, which to my mind is madness

Is it common for developers to develop main character syndrome and feel the need to save Bitcoin?

reply
25 sats \ 1 reply \ @028559d218 1h

The 'harm' to nodes comes from the bloating of the UTXO set not cheap access to blockspace.

However the set could be bloated by runes or op_return arbitrary metaprotocols adopted by degens... That are infinite in configuration and design. They come and go with bull and bear markets and can happen any time.

Bip110 would have more support if fees were really high for a really long time but at sub 1 sat fees, miners think it doesn't make sense/it keeps moving the goalposts.

If bitcoin were really adopted fees onchain would be very high and onchain transactions would be very expensive, maybe 30$ or more. Spam doesn't fix that nor do filters.

reply
4 sats \ 0 replies \ @Taj 41m

So with adoption, monetary txs outbid slop naturally, no need for filters or forks

Would you say this only feels like a "problem" in this low use period, higher fees would price out most slop automatically?

reply