Ocean.yxz find a block! \ stacker news ~bitcoin

Ocean.yxz find a block!mempool.space/block/000000000000000000009ef7ac2c30976bc7e05c2cdab10e5a5de7efd96492a7

8822 sats \ 23 comments \ @nicosey 1 Dec 2023 bitcoin

2537 sats \ 6 replies \ @0xB10C 1 Dec 2023

It seems to me they aren't mining transactions with larger OP_RETURN outputs, likely because they are running Bitcoin Knots. That's a weird way to say "Hello World" as a pool which has a big "Bitcoin is no longer censorship-resistant, and mining centralisation endangers its security too. It's time to fix that.". IMHO just use the default Bitcoin Core template...*.

*. they're obviously free to mine what ever they want, but all the "block template transparency" blabla could have, from the start, included that they diverge from the (current) default mempool policy.

472 sats \ 0 replies \ @nicosey OP 1 Dec 2023

Luke Jr not a PR guy :)

63 sats \ 2 replies \ @newnym 1 Dec 2023

Wait a minute. I thought that Ocean was using Stratum V2, and as such each miner gets to decide what goes on the block.

1 sat \ 1 reply \ @rijndael 2 Dec 2023

Nope. They say they plan to, but are not currently

22 sats \ 0 replies \ @moneyball 2 Dec 2023

There should be far more attention paid to DEMAND which actually is the first Stratum v2 pool allowing miners to select transactions. https://x.com/bitentrepreneur/status/1730350206317703648?s=12

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @shibe 5 Dec 2023

So in other words OCEAN promised to be a censorship-free pool that's trying to decentralize Bitcoin using stratum v2.

So all the people who believed in this instead got a classic stratum pool running Luke-jr's bitcoin fork that rejects ordinals. So much for censorship-resistant and decentralized

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @justBrian 1 Dec 2023

Fair point i imagine they will provide more clarity soon .

362 sats \ 3 replies \ @elvismercury 1 Dec 2023

Seems like a decent amount of people would consider not mining ordinals a feature, not a bug. There's a kind of meta-market evolving here, maybe.

228 sats \ 1 reply \ @_stacktoshi 1 Dec 2023

It's censorship resistant. Is anyone stopping them from mining their own transactions? Everything has a cost.

1373 sats \ 0 replies \ @elvismercury 1 Dec 2023

It's even more fundamental than that: censorship resistant means that individual actors can make up their own opinions. If a big group doesn't want to mine ordinals, for whatever reason -- perhaps because they believe it's harmful for the long-term viability of the network -- then this is a way they may band together to express that.

And of course, you can see how, taken to extremes, that strategy could itself produce worse long-term consequences. It's a complicated system with complicated acts.

Everything has a cost.

Well said.

228 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford 1 Dec 2023

Its interesting to watch isn't it. Censorship is easy to oppose when its things you like or don't care about. Its different when it is things you find repulsive or harmful.

270 sats \ 0 replies \ @justBrian 1 Dec 2023

251 sats \ 0 replies \ @HardMoney 1 Dec 2023

Their weird block template missed out on 20% of fee revenue

132 sats \ 0 replies \ @DarthCoin 1 Dec 2023

We are fucking fix the problem with melting polar icecap... let it come guys, each time we see an iceberg coming, we will do 1000 btc txs.

We will do so many btc txs until we drain the oceans so we can walk to El Salvador. no more shipping containers.

Me after, few BTC txs, going to El Savador on the ocean bed floor...

35 sats \ 2 replies \ @DarthCoin 1 Dec 2023

OK, now we can go back to draining oceans (sic)

32 sats \ 1 reply \ @nicosey OP 1 Dec 2023

After we are done with swimming pools...

11 sats \ 0 replies \ @DarthCoin 1 Dec 2023

No worry, now he have Bitcoin cloud factories...

2 sats \ 0 replies \ @niftynei 3 Dec 2023

update: they found a second one https://damus.io/note1pcurrjky2zptq6whfl30mjvjyeczman4avzuun2sa505s6j5kxpstgqtvz