why do people keep linking me this scammer, go read stuff by people who actually understand how bitcoin works, like this very informative answer by sipa
Discussion
"Speaking for myself, I hope you believe me when I say that is not the motivation at all. I think these use cases are temporary hype cycles, and not rational use of blockchain space, but the market can stay irrational for a long time. However, I believe that attempts to discourage these use cases through node relay policy, in the presence of widespread evidence that miners accept these transactions anyway, are ineffective, akin to making nodes bury their heads in the sand, and ultimately harmful to the decentralization of the system at large."
How is it harmful to decentralization if we set our own mempool relay policy?
How does changing the default settings to relay bigger op_returns NOT increase the potential for images to be relayed?
Don't see anything new in this answer.
Because the folks who want to issue junk on the chain opt to go to specific miners directly to include their junk. These specific miners then outperform smaller miners due to the fees they receive in this manner — rinse and repeat this be behavioural pattern and soon we have centralization of mining.
The reason why they go about this way is because if they just send their non-standard txs to the mempool of their nodes the propagation path for remain scarce because of the data carrier limit. This limitation feeds this behaviour.
....please continue your logic....
the current default setting- (filters)
feeds behavior- (special action/cost required to publish spam)
=
Solution: change the default setting so it is easier to publish spam.
****
It seems very odd you leaving a real risk here: miner centralization. Focus on what's important.
More spam doesn't help petahash miners to solo mine.
Filters provide greedy miners that put profits above Bitcoin's network health an edge — that's the real attack vector worth everyone's attention.
thanks to mara slipstream- created by anti-knots activist PortlandHodl. Any other examples?
That's a precedent that will only multiply if propagation path remains scarce; meanwhile, junk hype cannot sustain itself by constantly outbidding standard use case. I'm as anti-junk as you but I try to look at things objectively.
If PortlandHodl didn't literally create slipstream, you wouldn't have this argument in favor of less restrictions on spam. Awfully convenient, or are you still intellectualizing?
This was a great read, thanks for sharing
This is a good link, thanks for sharing.
A very sober take from the responder — my respect.