Avatar
Lonelypumpkins
964cb93909b0a0115bd7793fa92bdd3f416ef373c3bb280f7b64129a216a783d
🐤

If the transaction itself pays to a certain pool's address, that might be out of band in the context that it's not calculated in the txn fee...certainly more transparent than using a credit card to pay a pool to include a txn.

I have wondered about that...if pools currently monitor the mempool for transactions that pay to their own publicly known addresses. One could pay a small txn fee and have one of the outputs be a certain pool's address, so that pool's incentive to include it is much more than other pools'.

close approximation...to be more accurate, you'd want to make those candidates several years older than the US median life expectancy

#m=image%2Fjpeg&dim=524x499&blurhash=%7CMDJ-Z%3Fv%3FctRM%7CRjV%40j%3Fj%40*0D%25o%23WYozj%5Baej%3DWAyEDiRjt7xuxuaeRjRj%25io%23bIj%5DWCWBWAWAof%25N%25Mt7ogbIWUafoLofRjMxIAWCbIj%5DofV%40ayE1IUM%7Bj%5Bt7ofayWBay%25NtRWBflWBRjofj%5Bj%5B%25MogaeaeWBWCozoff6&x=1233d2b1aa0bff6bf1b6ad483c9d66afd4766c701b9a90d3a21168a999fbd9f1

A reminder to those affected that value in your brokerage account isn't actually yours...what you hold, buy and sell is at the pleasure of daddy custodian.

When your value is in sats, it's been set free, to do with whatever you wish.

For anyone wanting to gift on-chain sats to multiple people this season, a way to decrease your transaction fees is to batch the payment into a single transaction. Electrum, blue wallet, and especially Sparrow make this process straightforward.

For Sparrow, when in the "send" tab, just click "+Add" on the right, and you can input the additional addresses and amounts in the new tab.

If you were to gift sats to 5 people, with a fee rate of 150 sat/vbyte, sending to each of them with their own transaction would cost 21k sats per person...sending as a single batched transaction would cost 8k sats per person.

Might help you grok this if you mess around with a SHA256 calculator, like https://xorbin.com/tools/sha256-hash-calculator

Paste in the first paragraph (the description under the calculator, starting with "The SHA") and it'll give you a hash that starts with ae8b.

If I told you to make changes to that paragraph until you generate a hash that starts with 0, you should hit that target once every 16 modifications on average, regardless of if you start adding letters to the beginning, subtracting from the middle, or changing punctuation at the end.

Instead of that paragraph, hashers are using block templates and nonces as inputs. Both can change every time, or just one can change, and the odds of finding a hash below the target isn't affected by which one is changing (or if it's one or both).

You have to keep iterating changes, then hashing with SHA256, to keep trying to find a hash under the current target.

A few of these levers are to include/exclude a transaction, reorder transactions, or iterate the nonce.

All hash attempts are equiprobable in finding a valid block, irrespective of which levers you're pulling.

#m=image%2Fjpeg&dim=500x635&blurhash=_EEL%3FD%2510058E1%24%24%252%3D%7BWBI%3BIoRixaRj%3FwozDi%250enM%7CkCJ%3AxZw%5DxaNHELt6tmRjV%3FxaM%7BWBofoyI%3BRis.xuxaR-Q-of%25MIpNHt6WB%24*s.IoNGt7oLxt4oWB%25MocxaWXj%5B&x=5ec2afe3c1b6d38536ccac80a768484496c8ed7d58a0d77ee8d732102fd2742f