Subnostr

So the issue that someone with deep pockets can keep raising the fees to make the chain hard to use for the long tail. Long tail is like developers, people opening channels, casual users, L1/L2 interactions, and also the poorest people in the world.

It's an expensive attack, but not THAT expensive. For example if a nation state really wanted to annoy bitcoin they could do that. It wouldnt kill bitcoin, from many POVs it would be good, but it would hurt.

Larger blocks defend against this attack by making the cost more expensvie. Let's say I was paying 1 million per day before, I might be paying 1.1 million instead, or even 2 million, and on top of that they have to keep it up for long periods. Eventually they run out of money. Or better still, the cost is so high they dont try in the first place.

node 2y ago

I think the bitcoin timechain is working exactly as it’s supposed to. More traffic causes fees to rise. Free market in its purest form.

I don’t see udi’s ordinals as an attack. It’s just shitcoining on the chain

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Melvin Carvalho 2y ago

That's a perfectly reasonable starting point. I'd encourage you to think more deeply about the the nuances. Will the spam attack has some level of disruption right now, as the spammers have relatively shallow pockets. Consider what an attacker with deep pockets could do. Consider that this is just a wave before a bigger wave. Think adversarilly, about the threat surface. You are right that the timechain is working as it is supposed to, and that's an amazing thing. But it would work as its supposed to with no matter the size. We need to think in terms of attack, defense, decisions and trade-offs. Bitcoin is great, but dont rule out the possibility we can make it even stronger and more robust.