Replying to Dan

Wouldn’t the transaction fee itself be a very strong disincentive? In order to spam the network, one needs to pay high enough fees to be included in blocks. When fees are high (due to spam or otherwise), the cost of putting spam into the network is high. Spamming is incredibly costly and therefore the spammer can’t keep it up without bankrupting himself. Am I wrong? #asknostr #bitcoin
Avatar
Bitcoin_To_The_Oblivion 1y ago

https://primal.net/e/note1ss06qph96theqe249qflx5kmg9pr4yhzegmn293eetlj7zt0dfeqdfsc5l

You are not getting incentive structure of the spam. They don't care about exchanging value. They care about gambling and speculation.

When purpose and incentives are totally different, you can't say that high fees will kill spam.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

d7
Dan 1y ago

I don’t understand. They want to spam. Spamming costs them money. They cannot sustain the spam because it’s costing them a lot of money. Am I wrong?

Avatar
Bitcoin_To_The_Oblivion 1y ago

What if one of these spammers are government entity. They can always print unlimited amount of money from their money printer and spamming the #bitcoin network for days (if not weeks).

It doesn't take much to do DOS attack on Bitcoin network with this legitimate bug.

d7
Dan 1y ago

That’s a good point. A legitimate attack vector. However, the only people who could do this in a sustained and meaningful way are governments. Am I wrong?