#m=image%2Fjpeg&dim=1080x1035&blurhash=%7C74emrnfnIp2NTaag8W7nNR_s%3Fo%24WQs%40kDW8oiWBRdSZktsFsGo%25niavW%3FtCs%3FoGf3X4W%2CjFbIaxxzstnfW*X3WTWSf-jcRxRykYs%5Br%5DsqkEawawRyWSf-oNn-oMj%40jbawtDsti%5DWRSbWmaxfQj%5EayjdaeWTa%7Daxfij%5Bj%5D&x=c91b4f17cd1dd96a1ffaea9b7850bae2be2065b6d83b840e383c40d948f78b2a
If this is what I think it is, all those sats went to the same address so they count as "1" in above's statistic.
For a mempool cost point of view, UTXOs matter. For a number of active wallets, addresses matter although they are still a poor proxy.
If this is what I think it is, all those sats went to the same address so they count as "1" in above's statistic.
For a mempool cost point of view, UTXOs matter. For a number of active wallets, addresses matter although they are still a poor proxy.
No replies yet.