Aaron van Wirdum's avatar
Aaron van Wirdum 2 months ago
Ok I find using the term "consensus" a bit confusing in this context, since that could also be just one or two guys :) What you're really saying is that anyone should be free to run whatever filters they want, which I not only agree with but also matches factual reality right now. (People decide what node software to run.) I believe it would take some ~95% of nodes to filter certain transactions before it meaningfully stifles their ability to make it to miners over the p2p network. Is that what you have in mind when you say you'd ideally want users to prevent what ends up in blocks? (To be clear my question is about the method-- not about the exact number as long as you agree it's a reasonable approximation; it could also be 90% or 99% as far as I'm concerned.)
↑ Parent

Replies (1)

Super Testnet's avatar
Super Testnet 2 months ago
> I believe it would take some ~95% of nodes to filter certain transactions before it meaningfully stifles their ability to make it to miners I agree, especially with your parenthetical caveat. However, I also think many miners start questioning the wisdom of mining widely filtered transactions well before ~95% filtering is reached. Mining a widely filtered transaction means your block will propagate more slowly than if you did not mine that transaction, which, especially for small miners, increases the likelihood of it becoming a stale block. Making miners think twice about whether it's worth it is, imo, a good thing. Again, the more people run filters, the stronger this effect, but I bet it starts having an effect as early as 50% filtering.
↑