pull down to refresh
You'll be much more likely to know those answers than me.
If BIP-110 never gets close to 50% then this whole thing will really never have mattered.
I have zero influence. I'm just an observer.
Just an observer answers the first. I avoid getting emotionally invested in things I have no control over.
I don't think I'm bailing on bitcoin either way, so I'm not sure there's a meaningful sense in which I'm pro or anti. I doubt it's going to happen and I'm perfectly fine with that.
Probably very incompetently
I worry about this. Not for me because I have only 70k sats outbound left with k00b and 35k inbound on an LSP who both said they're not gonna fork, and I haven't yet fuly architected my next LN node.
But I worry for people who will lose money because they get doublespent on the force close.
I think it is, because Luke is the one failing to force a policy from a 2.5% share of hashrate. The sole reason why miners mine spam is because it is profitable. So if you really want to make spam priced out, reduce block size to 100kB. I don't see that in BIP-110, because they have no fucking clue what they're doing. It's all politics.
My question is this: if 70% of the network is profit maxi, 10% is weird (f2pool) and the other 20% is mixed, why do we entertain this narrative?