Quote from: NotFuzzyWarm on Today at 01:26:32 PM

Quote from: Coose365 on Today at 03:31:50 AM

...
yes. but being able to push more through a block would just be beneficial for everyone even the monkey tards. Lets be honest the 1MB block limit is holding BTC back, we can store alot more data now for dirt cheap.

And folks will be bitching even more about the storage required for a full node to hold the entire chain... BTC was never intended to be used for general storage of data. I've no idea why the hoards of idjits are doing it but increasing block size just to accommodate them is a horrible idea.

Cause the fee system is flawed and they are attacking the flaws.

2 big pools that do not pay fees to miners is all you need to this attack. They do not need the ordinals BRC20 shit to do it.

Simply send 0.0000050 enough and pay 1 sat per byte since you control your pool take those first you can
greenlight 1 sat per byte. Fill 60% of every block. The remain 20% people pay big fees

500sats 400 sats 300sats.

So 40% of 500 = 200 sats.

60 percent of 1 = .6 sats

the block averages to 200.6 sat fee

you and the other big pool earn 50% of the blocks

you get ½ your fees you paid back

but you get ½ of the high fees back

= big money manipulation and profits.

also it will drive btc price downwards as who wants to pay 500 sats a byte.