nostr:nprofile1qyt8wumn8ghj7etyv4hzumn0wd68ytnvv9hxgtcpzemhxue69uhks6tnwshxummnw3ezumrpdejz7qpq2rv5lskctqxxs2c8rf2zlzc7xx3qpvzs3w4etgemauy9thegr43sugh36r, I'm curious if you agree with the chart.
~85% is generous imo. You could push it more aggressively to 95–99%, but I figured 85% would serve as a starting point, since I didn't want the whole discussion to revolve around the arbitrary majority needed for a filter to be noticed.
Yes, I think it is a good way to visualize the concept. Thank you for creating it. Two thoguhts: I would suggest using a different label for the x-axis, perhaps something more specific like "monetary transaction fees," instead of "transaction use case."
I also think that without filters, monetary txs can displace jpgs, which doesn't look like it is the case in this graph. Thanks again. Wdyt?
> I also think that without filters, monetary txs can displace jpgs, which doesn't look like it is the case in this graph.
I would generally agree. The minimum demand/value of a monetary tx/usecase would need to be higher than the highest demand/value of a "jpeg" tx in order to have zero spam/jpegs in the next block. This isn't intuitively represented I suppose for the graph (based on the x axis as you point out), but it's how I intended this to be interpreted.
