pull down to refresh

0 sats \ 6 replies \ @OT 3 May \ on: If we 'fix the filters'... what happens with transactions... bitcoin
I understand this hurts UTXO bloat the most. Wouldn't better processing power speed this up over time anyway? There is a limited number of UTXO'S after all.
write
preview
0 sats \ 5 replies \ @028559d218 OP 3 May
my point was that this looks like spamming the utxo set because each 330 sat output "represents" a memecoin in their protocol. and there isn't one filterer who suggests how this can be stopped.
if the answer is 'more processing power' then ok but ppl want to run their nodes on low-powered hardware
reply
0 sats \ 4 replies \ @OT 3 May
Increasing the dust limit to 1000 sats would work.
reply
0 sats \ 3 replies \ @ek 3 May
Dust limits are mempool policy. It doesn’t affect what can go into blocks.
reply
0 sats \ 2 replies \ @028559d218 OP 3 May
so... even if standard mempool policy was changed to 1000 sats indicating anything less than 1000 sats is 'dust'...
doesn't that make the current dust situation worse? the current dust outputs of 546 sats become unspendable.
and someone who wants to spend 999 sats (just shy of a dollar) can't. isn't that censorship?
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @ek 3 May
doesn't that make the current dust situation worse? the current dust outputs of 546 sats become unspendable.
Why do you think they become unspendable? Again, dust limits are mempool policy.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @028559d218 OP 3 May
not unspendable but if the vast majority of nodes enforce that 'dust limit' in their individual mempools, then yes spending those outputs becomes harder. did i misunderstand this?
the whole 'debate' as of late isn't about 'what goes into blocks' it's about mempool policy
reply on another page