its a public ledger. i know many tin foil privacy guys hate the blockchain and want to remain private in a lazy way, hate that mixers can be found easily and funds used in mixers can be found easily and treated with suspicion.. but instead of crying about how public/suspicious your transactions can be treated. try to learn what investigators DO do so you can learn ways around their methods

currency has never been private, even the romans had currency controls 2000+ years ago

the issue is that bitcoin lost its 2009-2013 private property status when it became currency in 2014
so now currency rule apply, creating the business need of things like chain analysis

chain analysis gathers information from many sources, not just the blockchain. they dont have info on every btc. but when they do find ties that bundles funds together, they do
however the information they get is only as good as the data they get

so if tin foil hat nutjobs pretend to want privacy but are publicly posting addresses and examples of them using mixers.. the nutjobs are the ones providing the ties that bind them

easy lessons to learn:
if you ever use mixers, your on some investigation
if you use any service listed in the DCG portfolio, those details are 100% shared with chain analysis

https://www.worldometers.info/oil/
enjoy

no one can predict what the price will be at any given time. so no one can be wrong because there is not sentiment that people should be right.. EG is a random number generator wrong for generating a random number

however by looking at world efficiency cost of mining as a minimum cost of the planet. its safe to say the price would not have gone below $20k so although i dont like these analysts that pretend to predict the price he may have been right that if there was a crash the spot market bottom may have been $23k

heres the thing.. to buy fertiliser to grow crops to feed the cows cost something..
so burning the manure and then buying fertiliser elsewhere is not cost efficient

burning manure doesnt create enough watts to keep several miners running 24/7

the more cost efficient is to use manure to fertilise land to grow crops to feed the cow to maturity. to sell the cow to then use the income to buy electric from the grid to power a miner

the amount of manure coming out of one cow to  burn for miner energy will not produce enough electric compared to selling the cow and buying grid electric

so burning manure wont earn good electric production and then having to buy fertiliser to crow crops will add into those costs too

..
yes using a manure degradation process can produce some excess methane before then using the solids as fertiliser.. but the cost of the decomposer and then the cost of a biofuel burner and electric generator wont cover the cost saving of using the biogas to reduce the amount of electric you'd need to  buy from the grid

its more efficient to just spread manure on the field let crops grow, let cows eat crops and then sell the cow to then buy electric

unless the farmer is also an engineer and can make the decomposer and generator cheap from scrap materials he can scavenge from locals.
..

alot of people SAY solar and biogas is cheap electric production.. but that is if you are spreading the hardware cost over a decade+
however we all know hashrate increases meaning mining competition increases and so every 2 year people need to buy more hardware to double up hashrate to stay in the hash race. meaning although you buy solar or biogas generator to power Xminers in year one. by year three you are doubling capacity. meaning your costs dont last decades but just a couple years meaning the energy production isnt spread over a decade but a few years before upgrading more hardware, so that multiplies the cost by 5x compared to what some may tell you

the question still remains.. who says that people should be forced to pay a minimum of 1sat/byte increments

if everyone today decided that 1sat/decabyte was a thing. then a 226byte tx would be 23sat instead of 226sat starting point, where the competition for priority can start from a lower spend amount

and eventually we can move to 1 sat/kbyte were all transactions under 1kb are just 1 sat starting point but where a 226byte tx gets more priority than a 408byte tx because pools would rather have 4x tx's of 226 paying a total of 4 sat combined for the 1kbyte space. rather then 2x of 408 where the pool only gets 2sat for the 1kb space .. rather than 1tx of nearly 1kb paying just 1sat total for 1kb space

we need to move away from the centralised wallets that have default fee estimation code. and start to make wallets or use wallets that allow custom fee formulae. especially ones that are not designed to pump a fee war and instead attempt to make things better for users while still punishing the bloaters

saving is like this:
if 1sat is 215 by your own example and 1.03 is 220sat
compared to default whole sat increments where 2sat would be 430sat not 220sat

so by incrementing at small amounts of .03 instead of moving to whole increment of 2sat/byte you would save 210sat

again
215byte at 1sat/byte = 215sat
215byte at 2sat/byte = 430sat
vs
215byte at 1.03sat/byte = 220sat

430-220=210sat saving by using 1.03sat/byte instead of 2sat/byte

subsat increments are cheaper then wholesat increments

most people put their paper/card stuff in recycling bins.. where the general waste is the more hazardous stuff that cant be recycled. incinerating this stuff will cause poisonous fumes if just dumped into a fire.. or excess costs to sift through the trash to find the safe materials to burn

its not cost effective

$1 is 0.00003846 (at a whole btc rate of $26k)
a lean tx of 226byte means the sat/byte rate is 17sat/byte

this means if you know maths(doubt you do)
that if the same lean tx was 20sat/byte the total would be 0.00004520 which is $1.17
and thats for a LEAN tx. average tx are bigger meaning they pay more then $1.17

the sudden drop is a obvious sign that it was not a large community of lots of random people.. but instead just a couple of people working together and collectively they got bored/didnt make profit and so realised they wasted their time

if it was more random of lots of people the drop would not be sudden nor to any large extent because different people making choices at different times would have varied the production.. so its obviously just a couple scam spammers and not a large community

---

another thing i have to keep reminding people is that we dont have to actually measure transactions in minimum of 1sat/byte which increment by a sat per competitive bidding

imagine if we done it instead as:  1sat/kb
where by a lean 226byte tx is more prefered than a 408byte tx because although both tx only pay 1 sat. the leaner tx uses less space meaning a pool can fit more than 2 lean tx's in the space of a single bloated tx, thus gets more income over all by fitting in more transactions

think about it if a user pay 1sat/kb meaning both transactions are 1sat. the mining pools would prefer 2x 226byte tx's rather than 1 tx of 408bytes. because the 408byte tx only pays 1sat. but 2x tx of 226byte pay a total of 2sat.. meaning mining pools prefer leaner transactions. and it makes users want to make their tx leaner to have more of a better position

EG if you had
p2pkh 1in2out (226) = 4.42 priority
p2pkh 1in3out (260) = 3.84 priority
p2pkh 2in2out (374) = 2.67 priority
p2pkh 2in3out (408) = 2.45 priority

because the leaner a tx is the more priority it gets because the pool can then fit in more tx's paying 1sat/kb

i know some will now reply to argue that no one will want to bid in sat/kb measure as its a huge leap from sat/byte.. but we can always do sat per decabyte

meaning a 226byte tx is 23sat instead of todays minimum of 226sat

gold crazy Peter Schiff was anti crypto years ago. but even he now wants a crypto blockchain to register gold ownership..

funny part is over the years he was also doing deals to get people to sell their crypto to buy gold... in short he was buying bitcoin while getting rid of his gold ownership

in short.. he actually likes bitcoin personally but pretends to be anti-bitcoin for these reasons:
a. it hurts his gold business if people use their fiat to buy btc instead of gold
b. he doesnt want to pump btc via influencer status because it harms his personal cost of buying btc
c. his BTC is his secret untaxed 'offshore account' he doesnt want the IRS knowing about

you will see many bitcoin lovers secret pretend they dont have any or they dont like it.. but their hoard says otherwise

take elon musk.. he still owns a large hoard of bitcoin. he never outted himself as  bitcoin adorer. it was media that found his SEC filings that showed he obtained bitcoin.. so he tried to avoid or break the media pump by pretending to be a doge adorer.

its like most investments from top guys.. when they shout SELL they want others to bring the price down so the top guys can buy at discount. and when they shout BUY they want other naive traders to pump the price so they can sell.. in short top traders promote publicly the opposite to their personal preference. because the actual preference if promoted would shoot their own investment strategy in the foot due to competition

here is the thing though...

1sat/byte is not actually the minimum where by a lean 226byte tx starts at 226sat minimum

people can choose 1sat/decabyte where a 226byte tx is ~23decabyte thus a min tx is 23sat
people can choose 1sat/hectobyte where a 226byte tx is ~3hectobyte thus a min tx is 3sat
people can choose 1sat/kilobyte where a 226byte tx is ~1kilobyte thus a min tx is 1sat

where the priority competition could start at these new lower measures rather then starting at 226sat for a lean tx

the problem is although the protocol understands 1sat/kb.. the software wallets people use defaults to begin counting from a 1sat/byte stance. and count up in whole numbers of sat/byte thus because majority of people are just mindless drones to whatever wallet defaults exist they only start priority bidding from this higher point

he was only CEO of 10 months (nov 2022-sept 2023)

im surprised it took him that long to realise the scams of CSW. i thought a business guy with his work history would have done more due diligence before taking the job last year..
though i feel his role was not a proper CEO. but more of just a place holder name on a shell company just to make nchain seem legit as a proper business.. but not actually doing anything practically.. so basically it was just a income for a name badge.. and (my speculation) is 1 year contract was coming up for renewal and he simply did not want to extend it

i think that satoshis best gift to the community ws not just the code, nor the lack of desire to backup keys.. but to have re-used a p2pk key several times thats still funded to this day which proves even the most vulnerable keytype use of bitcoin has to this day 14years later, not been bruted or hacked.. which in of itself is the best proof of security anyone can ask for

logic and common sense is that when developing new versions of bitcoin code he changed wallets.. never intending to keep the coins all along thus he never had need to backup the wallet. thus when he updates a version of bitcoin, bye bye keys

not so much a direct intention to destroy wallets on his departure.. but more of a not concerned with backing up wallet when upgrading his node

things you got to learn

decade ago Nato/EU did not want ukraine to join their memberships due to the eastern edge of ukraine being so close to russia.. yes thats right nato/EU wanted ukraine to drop the eastern edge to then gain membership.. so EU/Nato and russia all want ukraine to lose the eastern side of ukraine and call it a independant state/ no-mans land separating ukraine from russia..

as for the UK brexit.. general citizens did not petition to leave the EU. it was a EU/UK gov internal decision first of all as far back as the millenium. which the UK government then made into a referendum.. to then pretend it was a citizen decision.. the vote was close but the agenda always was for a separation
the UK may seem to disagree on trade terms with the EU in regards to customs regulations.. but this again is a long path ploy to get the UK into a position as middleman in international trade
the UK wants "freeports" which are tax exempt ports where international trade can dock in the UK, pay no import tax. convert their produce into goods and then ship it onto the EU at a special discount tariff

yep the australian wine business want to bring vats of wine to the UK in waterballoons of thousands of gallons. and then bottle it in the UK to then sell to the EU.. america want to import meat into the UK and then to europe

once you learn all the back stage movements. you soon learn the story of the play being staged

heck even the climate agenda is a simple bait and switch.. everyone knows there is less than 100 years of fossil fuel in the ground left.. so conversion to renewable is always the path in the next 50 years..
yep i said it. if we continue with fossil fuel without crisis talks. the fossil fuels would run out anyway and the environment would clean itself in 100 years or less

but power companies dont want to use customers payments to fund the transition. so they came up with climate crisis to guilt people into wanting taxes and increased energy prices to fund it. after all would we agree to tax/energy price rises if it was just deemed 'business as usual' transition, nope. they know we need to feel our lives are at risk to fund their business continuance under a new energy source

we are no longer going to see halving cycles ATH of $32-$1.2k (37.5x)
we are no longer going to see halving cycles ATHof $1.2k-$20k (16.6x)
we are no longer going to see halving cycles ATH of $20k-$70k (3.5x)

things are going to slow down

that said if you take the fundamental min max speculation window based on world mining costs top and bottom extremes are
2021 had a $10k-$75k window (possible speculation limits)
2022 had a $15k-$95k window (possible speculation limits)
2023 has a $20k-$140k window (possible speculation limits)

we could reach a upper limit window of possible speculation of $200k by 2024 meaning the spot price "COULD" reach that.. but.. no way will we get $1m in the next cycle

i know OP is a LN supporter.. but its already a failed network. 6 year of bugs and flaws. other subnetwork bridges have more liquidity so dont point fingers that people should move to LN if fee's cost more then $1 per sat.. LN is not the sanctuary
.. many people are already using other subnetwork bridges

anyway onto the point of the topic.
bitcoins code allows sat/kb  meaning people can make a tx for just 1 sat that represents 1kb of data

however the blockspace competition would be that not everyone will get priority if everyone paid the minimum. so space competition will have rankings of people paying 4sat+ per kb where 1sat/250byte* as the min (*a lean 2in 2out tx)

so if 1sat is $1 then a average tx is $4 which as any economy of payment systems of history show. no one likes to pay $4 per wire transfer.. at current inflation value of $4 purchasing power)
even if we take bank wire(mainnet EG) vs paypal(subnet bridge EG) even if paypal offers tx for 1 cent people wont want to use paypal if it costs them $4 to close and open an account each month to rebalance
at current $4+ real world purchasing power... just look at the social drama each time there is a fee war exceeding $2/tx

..
i feel that over all, gone are the days of halving events causing 100x price drama ATH, and 10x drama are gone per halving, so dont expect a $100m btc any time soon

in the recent halving cycles we seen a 3.5x from one cycle to the next ($20k to $70k)
the next one might me 2-3x meaning $140k-$210k

so in the next 2 decades(5 halvings) we may only get to a couple million per btc meaning 100sats being worth $1-$2 thus 1 sat being 1-2cent

where the potential of a 1sat $1 being many many many decades further along.. if ever(the $100m/btc)

the time where i see $1 =1sat is where $1 doesnt even buy you a can of pepsi, whereby $10-$100 is a can of pepsi due to fiat inflation.. thus a $4tx fee of 4sats is a slice of bread cost

from what i can remember blackrocks ETF filing says that if there was a fork. blackrock would follow the CoreDevs+NYA group (basically cores code and the economic nodes of major exchanges/pools). so in short there wont be a 'blackrockcoin' thats different to bitcoin

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1980994/000143774923017574/bit20230608_s1.htm (p24)

jimmys 50k cheetos coins might be worth billions but the US gov will split them up into smaller auctionable amounts if they dont get any buyers for the large single lump.. its how auctions work. if no one bids minimum asks the coins are not sold and then a new auction at a later date is set for smaller split lumps

that said, yes large investors that can afford to buy the lumps, could make great discounted bids if they pick the right ask that hits above min ask but has no competing bids

thats not a clone.. altcoin are not clones

altcoins are genetically modified organisms (if we use biology definition) an offspring/fork
altcoin like BCH BSV are mutant, they are different