@based
13,616 sats stacked
stacking since: #19251
by
for
It's literally not a podcast if it's not an audio file available for download for you to listen to as you please and with an RSS or Atom feed as an interface.
Spotify is following the "embrace, extend, and extinguish" playbook in their attempt to kill podcasting for their benefit. It's a great thing it failed.
Automatic rebroadcast from the mempool could help somewhat, though not as well as being able to pull from peers in this situation. The idea in the PR below is both reactive and initiated by the network rather than the miner. It was closed and I can't tell if it's being worked on elsewhere. It seemed like a good idea and another piece of the puzzle, I was looking forward to it.
Are there privacy risks associated with a peer serving its mempool to others? Like perhaps fingerprinting a node using darknets, if that matters.
Can anyone confirm if this is true/real?
Since there's no details whatsoever, it can't be verified. I don't have reason to doubt it's true, but if there's a bug report it has been done in private so we don't know.
What are these tax rates?
The article concludes (among other things) that filtering the mempool of non-mining nodes is desirable, but I found no argument for why this is.
The term "collectivized" is more accurate than "free", which is a weasel word in this context.
A significant difference is the Liquid network doesn't use yet another token to enrich investors. Instead it uses L-BTC natively and which cannot be printed out of thin air.
Bitcoin requires fees to compensate miners without a tail emission. Bitcoin requires congestion to develop said fee market.
Lightning was meant to scale Bitcoin. If you are correct in that Lightning requires the Bitcoin network not to be congested and if there's no solution to this within Lightning, then Lightning is flawed and something else is needed.
Otherwise, get used to it and improve Lightning so that it works. If it cannot work, abandoning it is the right move.
Nevertheless it was bound to happen one way or the other. Either by successfully congesting the network using monetary transactions or by spam making monetary transactions more expensive than they would have been.
Either way, fees is the way, so best get used to it and build what's needed to still be useful despite congestion, whatever the cause.
Being closer just means faster.
Being shared just means there being less available in total.
None of which makes up for not having enough memory.
Please explain how faster memory makes up for less memory.
If wallets of today have turned it around to make RBF effectively opt out instead then I agree it's less of a point.
I'm saying opt in RBF is not a good user experience. Your answer is that opt in RBF fixes this.
Having to opt into being able to solve a simple mistake in advance is not a good user experience. It's asking users to plan their mistake and know to do so.
If always enabled privacy is somewhat better, because it leaks less information about the user wallet software and user habits.
Bitcoin settles on-chain. Settling in the mempool is not by design.
Bitcoin must be scaled up in layer and the current solution to small fast payments is Lightning.
I meant listing it among the specifications. It could help customers, I don't believe many do that.
Since you know roughly what software it will run at a minimum, you can provide additional value by also listing watts drawn and dB of noise while running such a load, after initial syncing to be fair. These are important variables to many when running in homes.
Is it easy to install? Is it using same commands like any other linux distro?
Though I don't want to describe NixOS as hard and foreign, easy and like Ubuntu is not what comes to mind.
I find the differences to be great improvements though, so it's motivated. Jump in but expect a journey.
Can't say anything about this instance without being there yourself, but noise pollution is a real problem. The cited decibel numbers are useless too since it doesn't specify at which distance. Could be a meter from the facility or it could be at the house. It's not just about decibels though, different noises are perceived differently and that's really what matters.
"That was an expensive fence," Nelson said, costing tens of thousands of dollars. "We won't be doing any more of that fence. It would be cheaper to buy their house."
Frankly, that's not a bad idea, do that instead if it's an option. If the noise really is bad, quite deviously really, the value of the house has been reduced. So it's cheaper now. If the mining goes belly up later thus stopping the noise, you can at least sell the house at a higher price.