Replying to Avatar MAHDOOD

Current tentative thoughts on op return.

I haven’t decided what I’m going to do with my node yet but I’m starting to understand why core wants to remove the filter. I don’t like spam and bullshit on the blockchain but this is a free market. If people want to pay for it to be there, and it helps miners, then what is the problem? 🤷‍♂️

One of the arguments made on the podcast:

People are paying large miners directly to put their spam in the blockchain. This is bad for miner decentralization because small miners don’t get a chance to profit off those fees since they are being filtered out. The op return filter is basically giving large miners guaranteed business and small miners get screwed. This is bad for miner decentralization.

I would like to know what the strongest arguments are for removing the op return filter. I don’t care about virtue signaling or any moral arguments. I don’t care what should and shouldn’t be on the blockchain. Tell me why filtering out the spam is best for the security and longevity of the Bitcoin network.

As of the writing of this post, 2 of the last 3 mined blocks have about 500 transactions in them. The next upcoming block isn’t even full and mempools look like they’re going to clear. Mining fees are at 1 sat/vbyte. Again I don’t like spam, but isn’t this a profitable way to secure the network when activity is low? Especially with so many people buying ETFs, there is little reason for those retards to use the blockchain.

https://fountain.fm/episode/owWcgNnmXx1r1vqOG2GG

Avatar
kc 6mo ago

There should be no comparison when we refer to money vs spam. If I ask you to take a picture of my family for payment instead of accepted legal tender… You would laugh in my face and say “PAY ME!”

Filtering out the spam is NOT the best thing for the security and longevity of the Bitcoin network. Nor is it wrong. Accepting spam is not the best thing either.

Using Bitcoin as MONEY IS the highest and best use case for the security and longevity of the Bitcoin Network.

There are no miners that only take “spam” and relay in on the chain. That would be death in less than 30 days. So it is not that profitable to relay and or accept the spam. Spam equates to maybe 50 million USD worth of transactions per year (which is not a lot of value.) I forgot the actual number that Slipstream had.

You commented that the blockchain has “500 transactions currently.”

Can I ask you how many of them are financial transactions? I would guess all of them are financial and non are spam.

In the short term “spam” looks profitable, but so is theft. It can help you today, but that isn’t sustainable long term.

Everyone that I know has “some interest” in money.

Less than 1% of 1% of 1% of people that I know have interest in storing items or anything on the chain.

(I don’t know anyone personally that has sent spam on the network.

As of now it does look like mining fees per transaction are low, but I don’t see not 1 large miner having a decline in hash rate. That is because the reward is far too high vs the transaction fees.

#minewithocean

#mynodemychoice

#runknots

#bitcoin

#lightning

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

No replies yet.