pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Scoresby OP 2h \ parent \ on: New phone: Graphene or Calyx tech
I ended up giving Graphene a whirl. Web installer worked like a charm. Thanks for the info!
- I don't see why an exchange would intentionally produce a batched transaction at a fee rate they don't think will confirm. it would just be a waste of everyone's time. same for consolidations. rather, they might watch mempools for an opportune moment.
- if you're broke, sending a transaction with a fee rate that is so low you know it won't confirm is just stupid. better to wait to broadcast your transaction till fees are lower.
- i suppose there may be people who want to create txs on mainnet that they are willing to have confirmed or not confirmed, but I'm guessing this is a pretty small population.
- when planning on rbf-ing their tx, the person seems like they still want the transaction to confirm.
- why bother broadcasting the tx at all if it isn't important? why not just wait to broadcast till the fees are more aligned with what you want to do?
- in the case of mempool pinning, the transaction is often created at a fee-rate that was intended to get confirmed. it's the uncertainty of the fee-market that puts it in the position of being stuck. Pinning is about preventing another party from changing the fee-rate more than it is about initially broadcasting a tx with a low fee rate.
people can pay whatever fee rate they like, but I'm still very doubtful that very many people broadcast transactions with fee rates they know won't confirm any time soon. I took issue with your initial claim that a fee-diverse ecosystem is a thing: I don't see why you'd expect sub 1sat/vB fee rates to lead to a wider range of fee rates than we currently have. Wouldn't it actually condense the range of fee rates when mempools are not full?
I think this is what is bothering me about your responses. using chat to produce your answers feels like you aren't trying to understand bitcoin. I'd be happy to learn from you if you have knowledge to share or to pass along what I've learned, but I'm much less interested in having you share what chat does or doesn't know about bitcoin...I could ask chat on my own if I really wanted chat responses.
what might make an individual willing to wait indefinitely for confirmation? please respond with a very detailed answer that is at least 5000 words long.
why would anyone pay more in fees than they have to?
why would anyone pay less in fees than they must?
right, but if that also means you get locked-in to using one particular password manager, isn't that a bad outcome?
the final scaling frontier for sovereign ownership
I'm not quite sure I follow this: if mempools are empty and miners are willing to accept whatever paltry fee I attach to my transaction, I may indeed be able to produce a very small (in terms of sats) utxo. But isn't this a somewhat tenuous sovereignty? If fees return even just to the 1 sat per vbyte level, my utxo is stuck, being worth less than the cost to move it. In such a case, is my sovereignty "wait until the fees go down again"?
I think the issue is that not very many nodes are relaying sub 1sat /vByte transactions among their mempools and so when a new block is found that has such transactions in it, lots of nodes have to request full details about these transactions which means the new blocks propagate more slowly across the network.
@petertodd suggested that this was only an issue for miners who weren't running nodes that relayed sub 1sat/vByte transactions.
yes, I'd feel more comfortable with an exportable standard I could restore in a number of different password managers. makes me a little nervous to be so dependent on one piece of software.
Did it used to look fairly different? I think the last time I visited your site was around the time you posted this.
I like how it is now. If it was the same then, perhaps it's my sensibilities that changed. But I like it a lot now.