What to make of this? Why would anyone do this?
Here's why:
You are probably right, dumb people don't have infinite money but you completely ignore that there is an infinity of dumb people and they are constantly expanding like the universe does. So, technically we have an infinite money.
With ordinals or runes, I can imagine someone's selling that crap to countless dumb people. But in this case, I don't see how anyone can sell it to gullible victims. It looks like one dumb person who's wasting millions of dollars, and usually people who are that dumb don't have that kind of money (anymore).
We need a blockexplorer that shows how much each address has spent on fees!
That's not really possible: most addresses have multiple inputs.
Even better if they keep creating small inputs to consolidate. See
this address: none of it makes any sense.
It might be a controversial take, but I'd rather have a delayed yet proper second layer solution, even if it's going to dissatisfy those transacting on-chain for a long time, than have every user temporarily satisfied but tricked into believing that rising the on-chain capacity arbitrarily is the way to go over the long term.
I "joined Bitcoin" in 2015. In 2017, blocks were full for the first time, which lead to very high transaction fees. That was 6.5 years ago. I'd love to see an actively used second layer solution, but it's taking too long.
The future of money requires proper DoS protection and a self-sustainability assurance mechanism, and that's the block size limit. The fact that an on-chain transaction currently costs $30 is evidence that it works.
The spam protection may work, but if it also restricts using Bitcoin as a payment system, it's damaging adoption. What's the point of a blockchain when it stores 80% spam?
so 60 blocks average fee for them around 3.5 coins
Why would anyone burn 15 million dollars on this?