https://unchained.com/blog/small-utxo-bitcoin-dust/

This link has some calculations taht might be able to help you sort that out for yourself.

Only unspendable if it costs more to spend then its value in sats. For a layer 1 miner with enough hash (or mining pool), there is no encumbrance as they can include their own transactions.

For the typical user on layer 1 however, I recommend keeping UTXOs above thresholds where the percent lost to transaction fees is uncomfortable. For example, if fees equate to 50,000 sats for a transaction, then this would be a hefty 5% for a 1,000,000 sat UTXO, and a massive 50% for a 100,000 sat UTXO. So DCA, but don't DCA tiny bits to a lot of small UTXOs. Perform appropriate consolidation when fee pressure is lower.

For related reasons, coins in other layers have additional encumbrance. For example, value locked in lightning channels may be effectively dust on your side if the amount is less then it would cost for a main chain transaction. Blockstream Liquid LSATS are pegged 1:1, but any sidechain, altchain etc away needs to take into account the transactional cost to transfer back mainchain if the need arises.

Where feasible, one could consider use of offchain bearer instruments (e.g., opendime, satscard) as a means of exchange without onchain fees. For example, an opendime loaded with 1 million sats could be exchanged for a good or service valued at 650,000 sats, and the receiver could provide change in the form of a lightning payment.

I just paid you 21 sats from my minibits wallet. Fees were zero sats.

Over time, the value of those 21 sats will increase. The value of sats can increase, and dust limit for base chain UTXOs can rise based on higher fees. Not mutually exclusive. Both can be true.

That super high dust limit you describe applies to the base layer. Where it is absolutely something to keep in mind when DCA'ing. No argument there.

Dust limit for lightning is quite a bit lower. Occasional 2 sats on a 210 sat zap.

Dust limit for ecash moving in a circular economy is ...zero? Until you pay a lightnkng fee if you want to swap mints to a different circular economy.

Both are true depending on the timeframe

$boost

I'm not sure how we resolve it. My inclination is to require a fuller implementation of the #Bitcoin protocol as created and designed by #Satoshi #Nakamoto.

Satoshi said there should always be some free transactions processed. I'm inclined to agree. Fees only make sense to me for larger time sensitive transactions.

People just wanting to consolidate their stranded sats should be able to do that for free. Even if it takes several days for their transaction to process. I would propose some kind of quota of small free transactions for the privilege of mining Bitcoin.

With respect to monkey shines and other spam transactions. It seems to me that miners should be held responsible for filtering that garbage out so that it doesn't consume precious block space.

I think we should set a date for full compliance. After which time miners that fail to comply will be sanctioned, blackballed and blacklisted.

This is what I plan to do with my own node. It would allow us to verify a sustainable consensus adequate to properly protect and enforce the network security and protocol.

That's where I'm headed with my node. And will encourage other virtuous nodes and Bitcoin loyalists to do the same. So as to protect the quality and integrity of the Bitcoin protocol..🧡😊

As the price of bitcoin rises, the transaction fees measured in Satoshis are going down.

If a transaction for example costs 2000 Satoshis today, it is going to cost 200, then 20, then 2 (and even smaller if needed).

So, if the transaction has a volume of 100.000 today, in the future the same "price" could be 10.000, 1.000 or even 100 Satoshis.

As long as the relationship between transfer and fees remains similar, this will not cause a problem.

lightning