It's choosing to mine a less profitable block. So leaving money on the table for miners. The reason? Censorship. At least that's how I see it.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

nostr:npub1qtvl2em0llpnnllffhat8zltugwwz97x79gfmxfz4qk52n6zpk3qq87dze is actually more profitable for miners and hashers than other pools from what I understand. And that money on the table is negligible when the risk is an outright attack on bitcoin that could be catastrophic in the long run if the bug is not fixed. Besides the multiple reasons people should not be scamming and grifting on bitcoin, the difference is between a high and low time preference on the miners part regarding the extra fees from the shitcoins. Do you want bitcoin to become like Etherium?

he has the mentality of an ethereum degen

Personal attacks. Classy, and highly relevant to the substance of the argument!

You could apply the same rationale you use here to censoring transactions of blacklisted addresses and your argument holds.

You could, but you'd be an idiot if you did.

it isn't less profitable when there is such a large number of transactions to choose from

usually in any given block when traffic is heavy a lot that ends up deferred by some block templating algorithms are as profitable as the ones that get in

ocean is just leaving out the ones that have equal value but are spammy

you'd understand that if you knew how transactions are selected to add to blocks out of the mempool

and your attitude is complacent and you are encouraging surrender... such a winner

It is provably less profitable to filter high fee transactions with large amounts of witness data.