Re: [Sep 2025]Mempool empty, Consolidate your small inputs @0.24 sat/vbyte
They are different things!
The network is secure due to the decentralization of the hash, not its quantity.
The network is secure due to the decentralization of the hash, not its quantity.
Yeah no...
You, Loycev, Pmalek with your gpu cards and me with my broken s19 that lies in the corner, could all mine Bitcoin and keep mining decentralized, while Philip would be able to revert blocks after we mined for 100 years with his asic farm.
Would you feel secure if you knew anyone with a million dollars could buy enough gear to attack the network? I can already see the next MrBeast episode!So, it is up to users, how much Proof of Work they will want to spend in the future, to protect their own coins.
The average Joe will not spend a dime for this, he will always ask others to pay for it, and from there you force the big bag holders to subsidize the security, which means the security depends on those with huge interests in the price and I have a feeling I've already seen this system in place
Also, when I'm talking about an attack, I'm not talking about reverting a transaction from ages ago, but making the chain a pain in the ass to use, tumbling the price of BTC, making more miners leave, and lowering the hashrate making the attacks more successful. You don't even need 51% to cause havoc, you just need timing, from block 914604 to 914609 ViaBTC with 10% of the hashrate mined 5 blocks but we're fine since it's mega farms behind this that have no incentive to do so, now, if this could be achieved with a guy from Australia
with 100 S21 in his basement that is pissed at the original non-SV vision, how would you feel?It's not me it's CK:
CK compared the transaction fees earned from the sub 1 sat/vByte transactions in their block with the block subsidy of 3.125 BTC. It would be better to compare transaction fees earned from sub 1 sat/vByte transactions with transactions paying +1 sat/vByte. That's a better way because it shows how much you earn from those two individual groups. Based on the numbers CK posted, their block was filled to nearly 70% with transactions paying below 1 sat/vByte. Probably that's where most of the fees came from as well.Quote
Now that solo ckpool has mined a block with sub 1sat/vB transactions I have data on the reward mined as the result of a low transaction fee period. Of the ~4900 transactions mined in this block, ~3300 were sub 1sat/vB transactions. It took some time to sift through the data of these transactions to determine what the mined fees were. They amounted to ~.0018 BTC more in fees, or ~$220. This is ~.06% of the current 3.125 BTC block reward.
Whole block in question fees were ~0.012 BTC $1,455, so ~ 13% of total fees.I told you, the block in question was 910440
https://mempool.space/block/00000000000000000000d22167aa0c9d1a49e7878631d6c93ea1b1c87b98ba24
Quote
Total fees 0.012 BTC $1,454
Subsidy + fees 3.137 BTC $371,495
Subsidy + fees 3.137 BTC $371,495
Ck calculated that fees under 1sat/vb were just ~220.
15% (my bad, not 13%) from total fees, and 0.059% of the total reward
Well, in other good news, or is it bad news? Fees of 0.29 are still getting confirmed with 30 blocks of jpgs waiting in the line
I wonder if I should inscribe a block of my own, for as low as $500 per block, to be remembered for ages in the chain.... sounds tempting,