Replying to Avatar MAHDOOD

Current tentative thoughts on op return.

I haven’t decided what I’m going to do with my node yet but I’m starting to understand why core wants to remove the filter. I don’t like spam and bullshit on the blockchain but this is a free market. If people want to pay for it to be there, and it helps miners, then what is the problem? 🤷‍♂️

One of the arguments made on the podcast:

People are paying large miners directly to put their spam in the blockchain. This is bad for miner decentralization because small miners don’t get a chance to profit off those fees since they are being filtered out. The op return filter is basically giving large miners guaranteed business and small miners get screwed. This is bad for miner decentralization.

I would like to know what the strongest arguments are for removing the op return filter. I don’t care about virtue signaling or any moral arguments. I don’t care what should and shouldn’t be on the blockchain. Tell me why filtering out the spam is best for the security and longevity of the Bitcoin network.

As of the writing of this post, 2 of the last 3 mined blocks have about 500 transactions in them. The next upcoming block isn’t even full and mempools look like they’re going to clear. Mining fees are at 1 sat/vbyte. Again I don’t like spam, but isn’t this a profitable way to secure the network when activity is low? Especially with so many people buying ETFs, there is little reason for those retards to use the blockchain.

https://fountain.fm/episode/owWcgNnmXx1r1vqOG2GG

How are you thinking about Knots now that some time has passed?

(I run Knots because I don't want to spam other nodes. My junk mail goes in my trash can, not your mailbox.)

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

I have concerns that filtering out the spam just pushes people to pay the large miners directly to put their spam on the blockchain. This is bad for miner decentralization since the large miners are basically guaranteed all that revenue. The smaller miners have no chance of earning any rewards for that spam. And yes I don’t want spam on the blockchain, but it doesn’t seem like you can stop it so why are we hurting smaller miners?

Miner centralization is currently being driven by template sharing due to pool financing. The issue you bring up would only come into play if #knots dominated the network, and it would only be a drop in the bucket compared to the template sharing issue.

Even if we were in the situation you describe, I think the impact of forwarding spam would be marginal. The miners would get extra revenue only when spammers are willing to pay.

If I'm able to help small miners a tiny bit by stuffing your mailbox with junk mail, I still don't want to do it.

The template is a huge problem that should be prioritized. The spam bs always dies down. Seems cyclical.

Mara increases its profit from mining by less than .5% via slipstream. Mass spammers that cause the most damage can’t afford it.