pull down to refresh
That's like saying the grocery store is a statist... Because they get money that 'doesn't belong to them?'
People give them money in exchange for other things
Home mining with a bitaxe 'at a loss' is sustainable if the loss is small for each individual. That way the cost is 'spread out' and economically for like... Millions of bitaxes in a million homes or something like that.
If we only had a million homes with a million bitaxes.
I know Peter Todd has proposed tail inflation forever but I don't think this would be seriously considered and I'm interested in other scenarios, if any exist.
This is a terrible idea.
My opinion... Is that we won't see better mining decentralization until we have more demand for blockspace.
Right now the vast majority of the rewards to miners are from the subsidy, meaning that FPPS pools aka FPPS "big pools" know what to pay out ahead of time and can pay due to their size.
If you as a pool know what your capital requirements are each block regardless of luck (whether your pool finds a block or not) then you can continue to pay out... Even if you don't find a block consistently day after day.
In other words you pay out the same every day to your "workers" because the fees are negligible and all you care about is subsidy and you know what that is ahead of time.
On the other hand demand for blockspcae can be inconsistent and vary wildly... Putting FPPS "payout guaranteed" pools at a disadvantage relative to PPLMS pools that only payout if they hit blocks. Basically because FPPS pools don't pay out more even if the fees are high...
If the pools only payout when they actually hit blocks on the other hand... they can payout based on fees in addition to subsidy meaning they will pay more relative to FPPS pools even if the payouts aren't nearly as consistent.
Ocean to their credit has really articulated this well - their PPLMS pay per last mined share pays out when Ocean actually hits blocks... Meaning that higher fee blocks will payout more than lower ones earning miners more...
IF there are higher fees to begin with and miners can deal with slightly lower variance.
Combine this with the censorship that is inevitable should bitcoin be used as a medium of exchange (big pools could be pressured by governments) and higher fee, censorship resistant blocks mined by PPLMS pools pay significantly more than the "current" FPPS pools that pay more-or-less on subsidy alone.
Its why I stress using bitcoin and paying fees as being so important, its not just miner revenue but the decentralization and authenticity of block template construction AKA actually decentralized mining as opposed to... "guaranteed payouts" regardless of fees because block subsidy is the only thing that matters.
TL;Dr actually using bitcoin has 4th/5th order effects that improve not only revenue but decentralization + miner survivability as well + network decentralization.
Edit - just realized this could be its own post.
Pick your battles. We don't want the creators/minds behind SN to get in legal trouble over CCs. There are legal/ethical/ideological battles to fight ahead but CCs is probably not one of them.
I took some sats I earned from stacker... (Over an lnaddress to my own node) from some articles I wrote and went to steak n shake and bought fries.
It blew my mind
You pay to post for the quality of content. There is no "free"... someone pays somewhere. That's the beauty of stacker news.
I know it sounds heretical... But I actually like the rewards. I'm not sure how they're figured...
But paying my AI prompts with sats I've stacked on stacker news is one of the coolest things I've user a computer for.
The "shitcoiners" for the most part never cared about actually using cryptocurrency... all they cared about was trading it and speculating.
Some exceptions but very few and far between.
Edit: based on my experience only one other (non-stablecoin) crypto is actually used to buy things and use other bitcoin... Its hard to get and restricted almost everywhere.
Optimism and others here vastly more knowledgeable than I am. However I report what I see... And what experience I have using the network.
Good luck
In my opinion yes and that's what we see anyway. At 1 sat / vbyte about half the block is spam.
At 2 sat / vbyte maybe 10%
At 3 sat / vbyte maybe 1%
Real global adoption implies 20-30 sat / vbyte over a long time period meaning that spam would be possible but extremely expensive for spammers, only possible for short periods, miners would be well compensated and an enormous # of people would be bidding to get into blocks meaning that small/efficient transactions would out price larger less efficient ones.
I personally think this will still happen... But it will take time.
In other words... My humble opinion is that currently bip-110 adds risk with little/no meaningful upside and isn't helpful at this time.
The 'harm' to nodes comes from the bloating of the UTXO set not cheap access to blockspace.
However the set could be bloated by runes or op_return arbitrary metaprotocols adopted by degens... That are infinite in configuration and design. They come and go with bull and bear markets and can happen any time.
Bip110 would have more support if fees were really high for a really long time but at sub 1 sat fees, miners think it doesn't make sense/it keeps moving the goalposts.
If bitcoin were really adopted fees onchain would be very high and onchain transactions would be very expensive, maybe 30$ or more. Spam doesn't fix that nor do filters.
My humble opinion is that people are just misled... There is no way to really stop 'spam' it is more or less an attack on the network that can take almost any format.
The only way to actually stop it is outbid it which is trivial to do at 1 sat/vbyte.
It doesn't need a 'minority of nodes' to agree to anything. It triggers sometime in august and the nodes running it start invalidating blocks from the "main chain" AKA actual bitcoin.
Then those nodes may be waiting a long time ie many years before they see a chain that meets their ruleset with more than a few blocks if they ever even get that far...
The 'new chain' with new rules needs 2000 blocks approximately to get a difficulty adjustment and at 1% of former hashrate thats... 200 weeks or about 4 years. All that time bip110 miners get ZERO new coins they can sell unless they have waited at least 100 blocks which means about 2 years... So bip110 miners don't get any revenue from mining for 2 years at 1% of current hashrate.
If bip110ers were serious they would be buying asics and a lot of them but it's easier to sit in the basement and LARP.
I'm not sure.
I like stacker the way it is now. Not because of the 'assmilkers' but because it is so unique.
If I contribute posts thoughtfully in a way that people enjoy, why shouldnt I get a few sats back?
Just to be clear that's not why I post, I post because stacker news is awesome... But I think people who contribute to the platform meaningfully should see some kind of value returned.
What's the difference between that... And getting sats "directly" from others in posts?