11 sats \ 9 replies \ @NULLPOINTER OP 10 Dec 2023 \ parent \ on: deleted by author bitcoin
deleted by author
Valid concerns at this moment in time… To your original question however, it sounds like you are looking for an answer to a problem that unfortunately doesn’t exist in this current fee market. Quasi-solution is to wait and hope for lower fees, or come to terms with that fact those coin(s) are effectively burned.
May I suggest taking this experience to learn and implement creative measures to prevent such a predicament in the future? There are ways to use Bitcoin with layer 2 systems (not just LN), that effectively solve the issues of a high fee market environment.
There have always been growing pains of how people use bitcoin, and this is just one of them. Adaptation is survival.
reply
deleted by author
reply
Why should any user of Bitcoins network wait because they can't afford to make a transaction?
The second half of your question seems like it answers the first
If you can't afford X, you can't obtain X. Defining X as "space in a soon-to-be-mined block" doesn't change that equation.
If that is the price a user has to pay for "using Bitcoin wrong" then we have serious problems that need addressed
What problem? It seems like a fair price to me. If Timmy obtained tiny utxos and now he can't spend them, that's no one's fault but Timmy's. Timmy shouldn't expect someone to fix his problems for him. He should learn from them so he doesn't make the same mistake again.
it is possible [to] permission and gate people from being able to use it
That does not follow if you define "use bitcoin" as "spend sufficiently large utxos." Timmy doesn't need permission to do that.
reply
deleted by author
reply
I am talking about scenarios where the user can't and should not be expected to know very much about Bitcoin
-
I don't think there is any situation where someone "can't" know that bitcoin has transaction fees of $60 or more.
-
If you don't expect every bitcoin user to know that, consider revising your expectations.
there should be no situation where the user is told they cannot participate
If someone can't afford to use the base layer, it seems fine to tell them "you can't use the base layer."
reply
There a so many things wrong with this, I don’t even know where to start. I’ll just say education and understanding are key.
reply
Bitcoin is working exactly as designed. Your problem is temporal in nearly every aspect.
If you are so concerned about bitcoin “failing” then consolidate some UTXOs to make them greater than the fee and donate to core devs. And if we are talking about one UTXO here, then honestly what are we really even talking about? The avg fee right now is about 7000 sats right now (which mind you is still going to miners)… How many people out there using Bitcoin really have <7000 sat UTXOs right now?
Honestly at this point I’m starting to think you just made a burner account to troll
reply
deleted by author
reply
Unfortunately in this case you are wrong. The fee market is working as intended (ordinals are bullshit but presently breaking zero consensus rules).
You put someone else in a situation neither of you understood and that sometimes turns out poorly. Still happy to help, but please accept that others here are trying to help by making a valid point you’re unwilling to accept.
If you want to see things change, either write the code yourself or propose a BIP.
reply