You sure about that?

here is a last call to the hat wearers listed below to participate in the 2nd edition of the Icarus hat-avatar cards
for reference, here is the first edition: [SALE] Icarus Bitcointalk Hat Edition (10 designs)🔐🧢
if you want to be a part of this journey, write me a pm

Exactly, I think because of the recent high transaction fees, investors in crypto currency, especially bitcoin, choose to just store their bitcoin in a wallet and not in an exchange, especially if they will not do anything to it just to hold the assets. This is because they will avoid the high transaction fees. Instead of frequent transfers or sending of assets, they will choose to do it in one transaction so that the fees are worth it. I personally avoid the high transaction fees. That's why if I need to send an asset from one wallet to another, I'm waiting for the fees to get low, as we know the fees may change every day, so if I'm not in a hurry, then I will do the waiting game. I'm sure many investors are also doing this if the transaction is urgent, but if it is urgent, then it will be painful for the sender as he will be the one to shoulder the transaction fees.

But is it even technically possible to prevent such an attack on Bitcoin? I am not talking about witness data or OP-RETURN, but speaking of the UTXO set where even pruning is not an option. This "exploit" has been there since the inception of BTC. It's impossible to stop people from putting ALL types of data that we don't want. Of course, it gets easier and cheaper with the current implementation, but what has changed in that regard?

From an attacker's standpoint, wouldn't it be cheaper to just insert illegal or copyright content into the UTXO set and spend all these millions that are otherwise going to the miners in suing wallets and exchanges, forcing them to shut down their nodes?

Also, to what extent is such an attack even feasible? Where I live, by law, I am only obliged not to sell illegal content. If my PC was searched by the authorities and they found some copyright violation, there is nothing they can do to me. It's perfectly legal as long as I am not making money out of it. I can put some cracked software on a pen drive and send it to anyone, and I would still be operating within the legal boundaries of the law. Many countries don't deal with copyrights the way the U.S. deals with it. Is it feasible for Nintendo to go after everyone who runs a full node? Do the attackers really think they stand a chance to kill BTC taking that route?

I personally don't think that is doable. I also don't think that Ordinals/BRC-20 are an attack "by design". It's possible that the attack is a probable byproduct, but the main purpose is profit. I think calling them scammers would fit more than calling them attackers (speaking of the devs behind all of this nonsense NFTs/Ordinals/BRC-20 on all platforms), and they feed off the greed that many people think they can sell the scam to someone else at a higher price sometime in the future.


Most members here are against Ordinals and BRC-20, not sure why you think they deserve what they get.


Well then, maybe "save us now" before it's too late? what do you 'as a former core dev' think the solution should be, what would the average Joe in this forum do to stop this?



I believe the reason why other algorithms have a better earning ratio in terms of both power and cost is the fact that a tight equilibrium is hard to reach on them. Simply put, not enough investors trust those coins. In contrast, with BTC, it's the exact opposite. If your $1,000 investment in a BTC ASIC miner makes you $100 a month in profit, you know it would take way too long for that $100 to turn into 0. On the other hand, if that same $1,000 investment makes you $200 a month on another algorithm, you know that it won't take too long to get to $0. It's basically the higher the risk, the greater the reward. I think of mining altcoins as bond class B and BTC as bond class AA. The former is likely to net you more profit but is also more likely to make you lose more.

ETF will probably not approved yet, so BTC and the others crypto will go down !!

I heard it today at night from the man, who has that supposedly from a trusted source... Of course it is not guaranteed information, but why risk. When I sell the crypto and the news will confirmed, it will save me thousands, and if not, nothing happens, I just buy it back before the price rises. When I think about it, the more people will sell, the more the price drops, so even if the message will not confirmed, it could help too, because at the same price everyone would get more ...
Hope it will help to people...
 
PS:
I wanted to put it on Facebook, WhatsApp, Instagram and so on ... but I don't have my laptop with login info, so if someone could help and send that ... 
It could help many people ...
                                                  Thanks and Bye

Fair enough, I hadn't been considering the ignorant enlisted-- e.g. people spamming out BRC-20 tokens because intentional attackers will buy them-- as attackers.  They don't intend to attack, they intend to "use" bitcoin to make money fast it just so happens that the actual attackers have managed to arrange things so that the "usage" is disruptive.

There are plenty of people who are irritated by the high fees created by this traffic who respond with suggestions to eliminate the resource limits, which are the only things holding back the attack and making it expensive-- and that's more where my warning applies.

And right you are that neither the attackers nor many of the people just trying to make a quick buck on the traffic give a damn if bitcoin is worth anything 5 years from now. But for the same reason, their concerns shouldn't weigh highly in everyone else's evaluation.

It appears that today the SEC actually approved the bitcoin ETF rule changes:

CNBC: https://www.cnbc.com/2024/01/10/sec-approves-rule-changes-that-pave-the-way-for-bitcoin-etfs.html

SEC: https://www.sec.gov/files/rules/sro/nysearca/2024/34-99306.pdf

Others:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-01-10/spot-bitcoin-etfs-approved-to-launch-in-us-by-gensler-s-sec

https://fortune.com/crypto/2024/01/10/sec-bitcoin-etfs-gary-gensler-blackrock-fidelity-hacking/

Investors spooked by X "incident"?
ETFs priced-in?
"Buy the rumor, sell the news"?

I don't see much action (yet)... 

Unfortunately I still can't see LN as a solution/alternative.
The alternative cannot be more complex than the main model. It has to be at least the same, or even simpler.

For me, these are the things that need to be on a second or third layer, not money transactions. But this is my view, which is irrelevant.

All but a formality now, calling $60k by Sunday.

Yea this is true but the possibility of them being active for trade tomorrow will be base on it the SEC will make the news official or proceed with a little further delay again…

No. You will stay up and wait for the ETF approvals.

Ripped off from The Outer Limits:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGY1osFbBAQ&ab_channel=VHSaves


I do love James Cameron's movies though.  

One of the very few directors who has consistently made good movies over 4 decades.

one of the best movies ever

that's what tptb want you to think...

I don't see a contradiction here. Money by definition is a store of value and Bitcoin has the potential to become Money. If some people see Bitcoin as a store of value today, that is not contradicting what Bitcoin was meant to be.

There is a difference between traditional spam attacks and this latest one called Ordinals.

In traditional spam attacks like the one we endured during 2017 the fee market eventually puts an stop to the attack as it keeps increasing the cost of the attack and the attacker has to cover that cost out of their own pockets.
Also in traditional attacks, the attacker can not get regular people to participate in their attacks.

However, in case of Ordinals this is not a traditional spam attack. It is a spam attack where attackers are going to have the possibility of making a profit if they participate in the attack! You see Ordinals is arbitrary data and is NOT a token, however they've made a fake market selling basically the transaction calling them "tokens" and they pump these things in their scam market.
This means unlike traditional spam attacks, the attackers could successfully get regular people to participate in that attack because the scam market gives them an incentive. That "incentive" also means this attack is not going to be a temporary phase that fades away.