I didn't realize that there were still ordinal people out there, but apparently there are some because they went through the trouble of writing an upgrade to their software that makes their inscription thingies BIP 110 compatible. This is never going to end.
pull down to refresh
In conversations I've had with technical folks about long-term scalability, they've never hesitated to describe soft-forks improving the incentives for making validation more efficient. The simplest one to describe is only allowing zero-fee transactions if the transaction has fewer outputs than inputs, in the hope of incentivizing a reduction of the UTXO set size. More complicated mechanisms could play around with things like "virtual weight" calculations, and include both biases in miner policy and actual consensus requirements.
My point ... well I don't exactly have any urgent point. I doubt Bitcoin development will ever be uneventful within our lifetimes. There are just so many people with technical skills and varying economic and political opinions, that social consensus will probably never happen, especially not while Bitcoin is less than two decades young.
That might be too simple. This would e.g., break incentives as follows:
it has been an honor, postponing this response to a criticism of my trite oversimplifications by @Murch
let's hope I don't abuse the privilege more often than can be reasonably avoided by not making stupid suggestions to begin with!
honestly, I don't have any strong criticism of the aversion to any soft incentive depending on the anachronism of tolerance for some zero-fee consumption of blockspace by aligned participants.
the only undisputable anecdotes I can think of before my perversely-priced cheapness of speech drops out of relevance is that during one of the spam attacks, people were doing things like dusting onto the brainwallet generated from passphrase
cat.... if someone likes leaving so many breadcrumbs that miners become brainflay afictionados, then the network should probably have some way of eventually baring fangs against consensus-legal preferences that rise to meet Jevon's Law like it's a schoolyard challenge.the only good news might be that such changes will always be soft forks.
It’s not a stupid suggestion. It’s just harder to get right than one might think at first glance. Putting ideas out there to get people to comment on them is how we make progress at figuring it out.
oh, how I'm having waaaay too much fun with this
can you figure out how to make a treasury company from bip 110 no shares?
https://twiiit.com/joakimbook/status/2073017339830759876
My golly, what a surprise
they will need to propose a new temporary bip softfork to fix it
Fuuuuu-nnnyyyy. BIPtards owned