Replying to Avatar nomadshiba⚡

knots isn't just about OP_RETURN.

and delaying blocks wouldn't work, because we have mining centralization.

i used to believe that kind of solution as well. i was thinking about making a plugin for it on my own node implementation.

BUT mining centralization is the main problem atm.

it causes all kinds of issues. once we get rid of mining centralization, then you can think about those kinds of solutions.

delaying blocks would benefit pools like Foundry, because they can build on their own blocks faster than rest of the network sometimes. because of the centralization.

mining centralization breaks everything.

many things relies on mining being decentralized.
Avatar
SatsAndSports 4mo ago

The more I think about this, the more convinced I am by my idea to delay propagation 😃. #Knots #Spam

Trying to censor these transactions in the mempool will just delay them a little and will transfer money to the permissive miners. Basically, not much good and a bit harmful.

If the goal really is to minimize large op_returns, I want to see a credible proposal that will *incentivize* miners to keep those transactions out of the block. We can't *realistically* stop the permissive miners from seeing these transactions, so instead we can encourage them to keep then out of the block (via delaying propagation of their block)

If my proposal isn't good, then I'd like to see a better one. But I don't think the current Knots approach is a serious approach

(And also, I'm not even sure that op_return limits, even if everybody enforced them, are really the right approach. I'm more concerned about the size of the UTXO set

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

No replies yet.