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 ...
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 fees are helpful for the security of Layer 2s such as Lightning, as it makes it easier for the honest party to get their transaction on-chain in a crisis. And low fees obviously help with scaling bitcoin
So our collective goal is to keep transactions off-chain as much as possible
An inevitable consequence of that is spam, but that doesn't matter. As long as we keep the spam in contiguous data (e.g. OP_RETURN and Witness data) then there is no harm to node runners.
I'd much rather 100kb of contiguous-data spam, than an extra 1kb of data in the UTXO set
Unless your money transactions *decreases* the size of the UTXO, please use Layer 2 instead
(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 fees are helpful for the security of Layer 2s such as Lightning, as it makes it easier for the honest party to get their transaction on-chain in a crisis. And low fees obviously help with scaling bitcoin
So our collective goal is to keep transactions off-chain as much as possible
An inevitable consequence of that is spam, but that doesn't matter. As long as we keep the spam in contiguous data (e.g. OP_RETURN and Witness data) then there is no harm to node runners.
I'd much rather 100kb of contiguous-data spam, than an extra 1kb of data in the UTXO set
Unless your money transactions *decreases* the size of the UTXO, please use Layer 2 instead
