Quote from: franky1 on Today at 04:22:17 PM

the notion of rare sats and counting sats is wrongly applied by Rodarmor

firstly imagine that you have a new block of 10 coins
oooooooooo
now imagine you want to decide to give some change to different people
and you know when spending that amount you will be charged a fee (call it 2 coin of 10)
(oo)oooooooo

so REAL economics is that you tell the system whom you assign the change to after the fee is deducted first
sooo, knowing upfront how much fee(2coin) is not counted in the change(8 coin) you tell the system this about how much the destinations get of the remainder

i want dave to have 4 coin and ill have 4 coin
(oo)oooooooo
()=fee
yep. the "first sats" go back into being a fee which goes back into mining rewards.. and the remainder(change) is split over 2 destinations
so the counting of sats via "Rodarmor theory" is not as people think, because the transaction value first takes the fee away and then gives change out to destinations

and before anyone tries to say the economics is different EG "Rodarmor theory" that in a 1in 2out tx the second out is always the "change" thus the first sat goes to the first out, and then fee is deducted after(facepalm).
this is not a true economic rule nor a rule at all.. some people can set how much of the change they want back themselves first and then pay out to someone else an amount secondary

so the real economic rule is the fee comes first and then both destinations get the remainder(change).. thus first sats go into the fee
.. but then again in the silly markets of idiots buying fluff.. who cares about math and economics of how things actually work

This is the first intelligent issue raised by someone in this forum. I commend you for actually sitting down and attempting to find a flaw in the system, and not shouting and crying about "nfts" when the post is about rare sats.

I believe that putting the fee last is the first arguably arbitrary convention. I wouldn't necessarily make the economic argument. Maybe it makes more sense to have the first sats flow into the fee because the coinbase transaction that pays the miner is the first one in the "to-be-confirmed" block. One could also argue that the fee is simply the remainder of the amount in the inputs minus the amount in the outputs (which it is) and that's why you pay the fee last because you need to have a set amount for the outputs to calculate the fees. There are arguments for both arrangements, that's why I agree with you that this may be indeed the single arbitrary consensus about rare sats.