@rleed
25,048 sats stacked
stacking since: #237032longest cowboy streak: 3 verified stacker.news contributor
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @rleed 21 Apr \ on: Halving Fee Chaos bitcoin
I'm no expert, but I have to speak up because I don't see commentary on one of the scariest parts of this. People think it's an unsustainable fad, but what if it is a SUSTAINABLE fad? What if all those unsustainable miner fees are routed by the handful of big mining pools back into the pockets of the fadsters so they can keep on going indefinitely? Do you honestly think any mining company seeking a profit isn't also participating in ways to leverage their block-templating weight to increase their revenue? The high fees of the fadsters force average users to pay more, but the average users don't get back the under-the-table reward like the fadsters do. It's old fashioned shill bidding. This is the single biggest ($1B/week!) argument in support of Ocean & co's goals of putting transaction selection and other critical aspects of mining back into the hands of the workers. I would love it if someone would debunk this hypothesis of corruption among mining pools, so that I can sleep again at night with the assurance that miners are my protectors and not my predators.
Alright, in that sense. In other words, some people will choose greed even if they don't need to and aren't incentivized to do so.
Human nature will not change because of money.
Is this really true? I think it is clear that the characteristics of money absolutely do change people's behavior through incentives. And consistent changes in behavior become habits, which in turn form character. Isn't that the same sense in which you refer to a change in "human nature"?
In Australia, "FedNow" would have just closed "BitcoinMagazine's" bank account. No joke:
https://sputnikglobe.com/20230905/australia-compromised-by-national-bank-rule-closing-accounts-for-speech-violations-1113137309.html
Bitcoin = just Bitcoin. We need people to start realizing that Bitcoin is much bigger. It is a whole world of its own, including cash options, privacy options, and much more, and that this separation of concerns is a feature, not a bug. For example, I don't like to say Bitcoin has a "scaling problem," because I don't see it as a problem but a feature. Bitcoin has payment via Lightning by design; I consider Lightning to be part of Bitcoin (and NOT wanting to compile it into Bitcoin Core). The same logic applies to privacy options and many other things. But for many, the level of comprehension is like this: "Bitcoin Lightning has about as much to do with Bitcoin as gold to [fiat]." (an actual quote from somebody)
100 sats \ 0 replies \ @rleed 20 Oct 2023 \ parent \ on: Large lightning vulnerability concern bitcoin
From the very beginning, I always saw the Lightning layer as a replacement for the bank layer in the fiat system. Banks can and should have selected, trusted relationships with each other. Operating a Lightning node, I have always been frustrated with the assumption that a node operator wants to network willy nilly in a trustless world. I want to choose my channels wisely, not entirely trustlessly, and in my opinion the tooling for that is poor at present, (although admittedly I haven't spent enough time trying all available tools).
Some argue this semi-trust tends toward centralization, but the counterargument is that anyone can start up a Lightning node to fill in the gap anytime one feels like centralization is getting out of control. We still have complete freedom.
A. Hodling takes coin off the market, similar to bitcoin that is lost, which makes the value go up (however insignificantly) for all. That means, by buying up coin, Saylor is increasing everyone else's bitcoin net worth.
B. Spending previously hodled coin puts it back on the market into the hands of others, which supports the bitcoin economy according to how the money is spent.
C. Either way (by mechanism A or B) the value is distributed to other participants. The more bitcoin is hodled OR spent, the more the wealth is dispersed.
D. The only advantage wealthy bitcoiners have is the starting advantage, because they have more wealth that they can choose when/where to spend. But over the long term, wealth is automatically distributed to the best value producers (through mechanisms A and B).