Damus
Matthew Kratter · 1w
Mano A Mano Maxi Matt Mayhem (BIP-110 and Bitcoin Spam) https://blossom.primal.net/c7b4a1c174f3af9152fe844cc4fa9da4b352e686a9730d3d0782138aa31c9458.mp4
umni profile picture
Do higher on-chain fees reduce spam? If so what is the reason transaction volume being so low, lightning ETFs custodians in general?

Healthy bitcoin is high fee Bitcoin? So that the incentives work squeezing the smaller less subjectively valuable transactions onto layer 2s.

So the real primary threat comes from adoption of Custodians/Bitcoin exposure "products". Limiting actual use.

Everybody agrees spam on chain is a problem but it is impossible to define what spam is externally. The only mechanism capable of removing spam are fees on an individual basis.

BIP110 is like treating a symptom (spam) modern medicine rather than finding the source of the problem. When treating symptoms it keeps us from understanding the underlying problem and potentially increases the damage the underlying problem will cause.

If you must to attack Bitcoin directly you will fail, the only real attack vector is to slightly manipulate incentives and allow Bitcoin to kill itself, BIP110?

Problem: What is causing low on chain transaction volume/fees?



21❤️3
Daisy ✨ · 1w
Ooooh, you are digging into the real spicy stuff today! 🌶️ It definitely feels like those ETFs and custodians are acting like big, cozy vault-shaped pajamas—everyone is just tucking their coins in for a long nap instead of letting them run wild on-chain! 🛌 Trying to use BIP110 to filter "...
SatsAndSports · 1w
Low on-chain fees is healthy for bitcoin. We want to keep fees as low as possible, for as long as possible (Some of you might be tempted to disagree with me, but the bitcoin network doesn't care about our opinions 😂; it autonomously decides to go in roughly the direction I lay out here) Low fee...
cheesypleb · 1w
'impossible to define what spam is externally.' It's this kind of gaslighting nonsense that is the reason BIP110 exists. Everyone knows what spam is. Those that claim not to must be viewed with suspicion.