Have 25 of the absolute most exclusive hats printed for Vegas. For promoting the actual most important thing in bitcoin this year. Seeking the 25 most interesting heads. DM me.

What was the custom tshirt company that were secretly bitcoiners? Someone posted it here a week or two ago. Maybe @ODELL ?

You don’t gotta call me out like that man. View quoted note →

The price:mempool correlation looks to be ticking back up. Nature is healing.

One thing I think people have a hard time grokking is that even a moderate amount of hashrate filtering some transactions they don’t like won’t actually drive up the fees those transactions pay, as long as those transactions are relatively time-insensitive. The market for less-time-sensitive block space is all one market. If one miner mines only a subset of the transactions available, a later miner will pick up the slack and normalize the ratio because they just take whatever pays the most (and those happen to now be the filtered transactions). You can see this (usually) in the inverse - even though OCEAN filters a ton of transactions (including all kinds of weirdly specific rules that might impact normal transacting), they don’t actually make all that much less in fees - it’s all one market so the filtered transactions bid up the price because the non-filtered transactions don’t know who’s gonna mine the next few blocks. This changes dramatically when there’s a huge demand spike for transactions they wish to filter (e.g. around the halving) where they may get paid materially less, but we’ve only really seen it the once. There’s also the case of current OP_RETURNs paying more, but that’s mostly a side effect of one transactor (the OP_RETURN bot) submitting only to Slipstream, which charges more than other options (mostly F2Pool). This isn’t sustainable if there’s sustained demand, as other pools will want in, though there’s little reason to think it will be sustained once the drama dies down (all the people complaining about OP_RETURN are really driving a lot of demand for them lol).

Bitcoin down on a day where the market is celebrating. Honestly good for Bitcoin.

Learn more about OP_RETURN and why making standardness less restrictive isn’t just Bitcoin Core navel gazing, it’s actually very important for Bitcoin! View quoted note →

I think this is an important thing to grok - there is no reason Bitcoin Core should be bound by “consensus” for things unrelated to Bitcoin’s consensus rules. Bitcoin Core is a software project with a wallet, a GUI, an RPC API, and an implementation of a P2P network for rumoring blocks and transactions. For all of those things, there’s no reason for Bitcoin Core to only act with “consensus” - can you imagine if they needed consensus of the community to make opinionated decisions in the GUI?! But specifically on the topic of the P2P layer - Bitcoin Core contributors’ jobs are to be good stewards to that implementation and do what is right for Bitcoin to maximize decentralization and robustness. There’s no debate (except from people who don’t understand Bitcoin) that reducing or removing paternalistic censorial standardness limits is not only good but possibly important for Bitcoin’s long-term decentralization. There is nothing that says anyone has to run Core, and there is nothing that says Bitcoin Core must only do things when there exists consensus in the broader Bitcoin community, especially when it’s abundantly clear those things are important for Bitcoin. None of this applies, of course, to Bitcoin’s consensus rules - that sub-project of Bitcoin Core has drastically different constraints. View quoted note →