👀

If so, why this measurement:

https://21.ninja/unique-reachable-nodes/total-node-change/

Please provide rationale.

👀

👀

The next halving will be more or less 10 years after this statement:

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/3737#issuecomment-36419468

The fascination for some individuals to store arbitrary data in the Bitcoin’s timechain probably is rooter in the intent to slowly break the regular node decentralization ownership.

This attempt will increase as natural persons give more value to sats.

And the interesting fact is, this OP_Return issue is an exploit of an unintended effect after a mayor fatal problem fixing done by Satoshi Nakamoto.

https://bitcoindevphilosophy.com/#cve-2010-5141

nostr:note1fsa5aeawf9gm8fvhtshykfdmxnfqut5xjnnp27u5tkdykq5wp3mqxsa4nd

For those asking: “Nash equilibrium”? 🤔

Nash equilibrium is a concept in game theory that describes the optimal outcome of a game where each player chooses a strategy and no player has an incentive to change their strategy, given the strategies of the other players. In other words, it is a state where each player's strategy is optimal given the choices of the other players, and no player can improve their outcome by changing their strategy unilaterally.

The Nash equilibrium is applicable in various real-life situations to determine the best payoff in a scenario based on the strategies of the players involved.

👀

👀

Well, with that configuration value the node would consider up to 1799 sats in an UXTO as “dust” and thus filter out more than necessary in the current situation.

Do you mean 10.000 sat/kvB?

Why should it be better than

3.001 sat/kvB ? :)

https://twitter.com/LukeDashjr/status/1700485383790690779?s=20

👀