pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @2minutebitcoin 4 Oct \ parent \ on: Will the Lightning Network reduce Bitcoin's security budget (transaction fees)? bitcoin
Would be nice to see a follow up to this. unfortunately Typerbole recycleed his nym and isn't active anymore on that account
Good website, what part addresses the security budget? I only found one link "“Block rewards will stop in the future and Bitcoin will lose all security” (safehodl)" and it doesn't work - https://safehodl.github.io/failure/#block-rewards-will-stop
Finding it via the web archive (https://web.archive.org/web/20240808135354/https://safehodl.github.io/failure/#block-rewards-will-stop) shows this:
Block rewards will stop in the future and Bitcoin will lose all security Bitcoin transaction fees have been steadily increasing with Bitcoin’s price. Block space is fixed supply. As more people demand to own Bitcoin on the base layer, but the block size stays constant the transaction fees will rise. Block rewards drop every 4 years until 2140 giving the network plenty of time to adapt to observed changes.
-
There is time, I'm not saying it's a problem tomorrow. But it's not plenty of time either. The moment the budget starts declining it needs to begin being addressed. It's not like a solution (especially one that changes consensus) will be merged in 2 years...
-
Fees have not been increasing in sat terms. In fact, a recent Core change lowered the minimum sat per vbyte. In USD terms they have increased (because BTC appreciated), but not materially.
-
Sure, in theory fees should rise. In practice, this hasn't happened (for whatever reason). It's idiotic to keep faith that it'll somehow solve itself through fees when reality is showing you the hard opposite
So far, I haven't seen any convincing counter argument. Care to provide any?
It's a cool website. I don't understand why it calls it secure though:
"The three memes are in a "good" state if the fee is less than 100 USD, the block size is less than 10 MB, and the relative miner revenue is greater than 1%. You can change these thresholds in the Settings menu.
Then the settings show the security threshold is 0.25%.
In any case -
0.25%, 1% of what, market cap? That doesn't seem to be the case in the chartbtw a related thing:
Every 4 years, Bitcoin needs to 2x in value to keep the security budget the same (all else equal); Otherwise it drops.
Here is the yearly-average price appreciation of the last 4 halvings, courtesy of ChatGPT and research:
| 🪙 Cycle | ⏱️ Years | 📊 Start Avg Price | 📊 End Avg Price | 💥 Multiple (×) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1️⃣ 2012 → 2016 | 1st → 2nd halving | $8 | $600 | ≈ 75× |
| 2️⃣ 2016 → 2020 | 2nd → 3rd halving | $600 | $11,000 | ≈ 18.3× |
| 3️⃣ 2020 → 2024 | 3rd → 4th halving | $11,000 | $70,000 | ≈ 6.36× |
| 4️⃣ 2024 → 2025 (ongoing) | 4th → current | $60,637 | $114,056 (latest) | ≈ 1.8× (so far) (3 years left to go) |
the question is when will this become an issue. as you can see, it has performed v. well since your comment
Maybe in 2-3 halvings?
The moment it stops 2x-ing, the budget declines
100%. People like @downtownjj are the problem.
Hence it's not fear-mongering. Any reasonable actor is reasonably fearful in an environment of adversaries
Ironically, Bitcoin is a faith-based money instrument. That's why it attracts faith-based people. Unfortunately, the subset of people who are both faith-based and logically-reasonable is very low.
Pretty much every major sci-fi writer was woke AF.
Would be super awesome to find some non-woke sci-fi
Wumbo, I'm grateful for the feature but I wish they touched upon the potential Core gaslighting which is the real worrying concern - not the CP angle
That's quite the wishy-washy argument. Reads like copium.
How much hashrate do we believe is currently mined by stranded energy?
Do you realize the stranded energy argument has been a thing since at least 2020 from that Stone Ridge report? https://www.2minutebitcoin.org/blog/stone-ridge-2020-shareholder-letter
5 years in, has there been notable progress?
Is there good reason to believe the next 10 years will be significantly different and offer enough hash rate to at least match what we have today?
For these reasons and much more other reasons
You haven't given more reasons.
Agree it's not accidental, but also there's so much hassle on a societal level to pay with Bitcoin. Chicken and egg problems are not easily solved.
Fiat was effective precisely because it was by decree (i.e fiat) - do this or else.
Having it come up organically will take way, way longer. And in cases where you don't want to use fiat, the uneducated people there are happy to simply cash USD.
Unfortunately it doesn't seem like Lightning is taking off... at all.
Lightning Network nodes, channels and number of BTC have all been steadily going down since peaking around 2022.
Check https://1ml.com/statistics under web archive for yourself.
Yes - that scare is why it's such a big deal right now. It's a theoretical risk and people have varying opinions on it.
- Some people believe it could be an intentional attack on Bitcoin (creating this attack vector)
- Some think that you can't get in legal trouble just because the data is stored in a more obvious manner
The way this is handled is the concerning bit. Discussions aren't being too productive. The pro OP_RETURN change side in particular seems to be resorting to mockery, name-calling and straw-manning. We really need to have a proper debate within the space and at a minimum hold off on this change.
The community literally gains nothing from rushing in controversial changes to the protocol. It only damages it. Even if one side believes the controversy is unfounded and dumb, they would be smart to pause, take time and unite/align the community.
It is extremely underrated. People don't know how bad it is and for how little criminals are ready to cut off a finger/kidnap you.
Even if you don't die - you don't want to suffer the experience of feeling hopeless at an armed gang set out to make you suffer.
See https://github.com/jlopp/physical-bitcoin-attacks for gruesome examples
The biggest concern is how easily trace-able it is, and will become, with AI-assisted tooling.
A sufficiently motivated criminal group can pretty easily:
- Collect publicly-available leaked exchange data (e.g the big Coinbase leak). They now know the rough size of your stack, as well as email/name (potentially address).
- 1a. they could also just bribe internal employees for data, this is an on-going concern, as your data is never deleted. Once you have bought off a KYC exchange, you can assume that data will leak in time.
-
Cross-match email with any other data breach off any e-commerce website. They now know your personal address where you ship orders to.
-
👋🔧
Further, the KYC exchange data (e-mail, name, address, phone) can all be cross-linked with various other breaches to get an AI-assisted similarity score to try and guess which details belong to the same person. In other words - it doesn't have to be 1-to-1. Maybe you re-used the phone on another website which has your same name but different e-mail - there's reason to conclude you own that e-mail too. Maybe they verify that e-mail in 10 other websites belonging to the same name, but also a new number in some places. Maybe they verify the email and new number consistently map to a new address.
It is safe to assume that sufficiently-motivated black-hat actors contain resources consisting of all of your online activity. The criminal groups don't even need to be advanced - they can just purchase the bundle of email/address off of the black-hat actors and then they have your information.
unless you're 100% carnivore, this cannot be correct. out of experience, we recommend you do regular check ups or at least look carefully yourself. oil pulling is a must if you won't brush
are you serious, the US or whichever government just accepts this letter and doesn't raise criminal proceedings?
I can't see this working. I know that in certain jurisdictions there is a threshold for unpaid taxes that turns into a criminal proceeding - e.g $120k - and at that point they'll put you in jail no doubt.