paying more does not cause mining pools to want your transaction more then a spam meme

there are already many spam memes that pay NO FEE AT ALL but allowed to bloat a whole block
https://www.blockchain.com/explorer/transactions/btc/0301e0480b374b32851a9462db29dc19fe830a7f7d7a88b81612b9d42099c0ae
 3,938,383 Bytes - fee: ZERO

telling everyone to pay more solves nothing
also $1 seems cheap to you but you forget one thing in your diatribe
WORLD currency. where by $1 tx or $22 tx are more then a few hours of labour,

you do know paying from first world countries costs XX using services like western union.. but third world countries pay far less domestically..
and what your not realising is saying "bitcoin is cheap" is not cheap  

but you need to look outside of your own prospective to see what the real world offers

a $1 tx for america is 50% of a US starbuck coffee
but its way more for a african, indian

so you saying pay more is actually pricing out a 3rd of the world from seeing bitcoin as useful

these ordinal junk are not fit for purpose as "nft" they dont have any representation of ownership in their recipients transaction.

its just dead data that stays in the creators transaction with nothing to represent it in the blockchain data when "spent"

ordinal meme spam has no place in bitcoin as it serves no blockchain function but to bloat it up into a meme library

..
as for those saying the rest of the network just has to "pay more"
that does not work as many examples show that these meme spam transactions pay less than the average and in some cases no fee at all. so no matter what other pay doesnt change the pools selection decisions. becasue they are not selecting to add these meme spam tx due to any rational fee proposition

yep many meme spam tx pay less than 1sat/byte and yes there are a few that pay ZERO

https://www.blockchain.com/explorer/transactions/btc/0301e0480b374b32851a9462db29dc19fe830a7f7d7a88b81612b9d42099c0ae

 3,938,383 Bytes - fee: ZERO

so you want to introduce stealing someone elses retirement/inheritance plans simply because they have not decided to spend their retirement funds in X years

um no thanks

once you introduce a way to take value away from someones utxo without their signature. your breaking many rules of bitcoin that cant then be unbroken

firstly
you have gone full doomad
pretending you have been around long enough to know better. then plead ignorant as if you havnt known or didnt try something to hide some other thing
and then waste even more time refusing to try to learn by just slinging insults
doomad has trained you well. you sound just like him

secondly
consensus allowed(past tense) for different dev brand groups too.. all working on the same level playing field. all working on the same network and all could propose certain things where the network upgrades when a certain feature has merit across the network.

now
its one team and that team is not a open gated community but a closed gate open book variety, they they now and again let some unpaid interns in to appear diverse. but thats just a tick box visual exercise not an actual productive effort

how about you spend less time defending the centralisation and instead think of things from the wider sense outside the small group and into the wider community of hundreds of millions

you mistake "total liquidity" vs "liquidity per channel" when you speak of the adoption rate of the network
you have much learning to do

also when playing the "pass the parcel" of value between middleent between the payer and payee.. the more the network grows the more middlemen need bigger liquidity to serives lots of small liquidity users.

once more ill make it simple for you

instead of reciting the same lame scripts ("read plenty" "but dont know how to set it up")
actually run some scenarios and learn how it works

you are new to lightning from real utility(lack of) outside of your "read plenty" scripts. i have been testing it out for years.. so take this as some advice.. LEARN what you are trying to sales pitch
and dont just recite what you have read.
actually figure out how it actually works outside of the sales pitches

learn its flaws and think about telling people for their benefits of the risks. so they can be aware instead of trying to be so pro-utopian best case

i set you a challenge in my last post. try it.
goodluck

you can do the challenge in a drawing or excel or even in ascii art. it costs you nothing
just try to learn how it works by running scenarios. it will enLIGHTEN you

challenge:
i want you to draw out a network. of say 12 users where each user has about $780 locked in on their side.

now try and draw out a network where everyone on the network can happily pay upto $780 to anyone else

good luck

..
right now all i see in the last few posts is the normal madhatter duo and their new child all trying to snake oil sales how lightning solves so much. but seem to all lack actual knowledge and just reciting sales pitches they tell each other.

you admit you have never used lightning
but it seems your becoming its new sales ambassador

seems weird how your suddenly going 100% hype for something you admit you have not used

by the way the more users. means either more hops to get to destinations or more channels to decrease the hops.. either way it means more liquidity issues.

you can try this out in drawing form or excel spreadsheet for free to run scenarios.. TRY IT!

there are many flaws of lightning. so before jumping forward with your prepared sales pitches. try to learn about lightning first. or use it without your "best case" utopian hat on.. and and run some scenarios. so you can have an accurate view of it.

oh
and here is the thing
lets say before that example i gave
it was a average of $4000 and your response is then "split it"

and then we came to the $1000 channels
guess what. then we enter the $1000 limit argument where because some routes are already used by others not everyone then has the full $1000 to move.. again the inability to move a full $1000 you then again shout "split it"

see the snow ball effect


i want you to draw out a network. of say 12 users where each user has about $780 locked in on their side.

now try and draw out a network where everyone on the network can happily pay upto $780 to anyone else

good luck

you might want to read into blockstream "founders"
whom got paid hundreds of millions to push the core roadmap a certain way to develop the blockstream products

then look into who paid for that (DGC) and how the NYA agreement( DCG) pushed to activate certain things over the years for their products

give it a go. learn something

oh and i never said ethereum is not centralised. but that does not mean that if i am calling one thing central implies the other is not. or the opposite
they both can be centralised

heck even ex core lead devs admit core is centralised

check into moderation involvement and also the plans for moderation they have for cores github. look at all the same familiar names all circling each other and protecting each other and not letting anyone outside the boysclub independently critique them

this is why hundreds/thousands developers moved away from bitcoin. because it became a small self serving dev club of a dozen main names plus a fan club  of some outsiders that only get to grammar check to get "contribution status" and then some fans who idolise the centralised version and defend the dozen main devs to do as they please while nack, reject, ban and REKT anyone not liking the central roadmap

@nutty
try to read.. try to learn
if you need to be spoonfed then you have not done any learning at all

if your read. even posts in this topic you will see others saying about one guy posting 10,000 memes

such as i was replying to a guy  that was asking why some guy was posting a tonne of memes
the answer is logical and common sense

its the same in real life art
if an artist cant sell 1 painting to become a millionaire. he instead sells 10,000 for $100 each to be a millionaire

or sells 1 million prints(posters) for $1
its basic economics

i thought you would be proud of an idiot trying sell/trade crap memes. seeing as you love the idea of a meme market

because the only other conclusion is that its just crap dead weight data they just want to spam bloat the blocks for no other reason than just to spam bloat.. something you dont want to think is the purpose

so you pick the reason

unlike you who tried so hard with the uptopian dream and promise previously that lightning was ontop(subliminal for better) than bitcoin and a solution to scaling for all bitcoiners and all the other blub you have recited since 6 year ago

you snake oil pitches failed. so now your changing your scripts.. slightly

it is nice to see your being more rational by actually saying that there are flaws. but you still have not tried to actually fully engage the risk awareness aspect that helps users the most

your still in the fake promise recruitment mindset. (well a more relaxed version of it). but still you still try to oversell and over promote a subnetwork with limited use.

from 2017-2022 you have been beating the drum that bitcoin should not and will not scale anytime soon because you want ALL bitcoiners to have patience while lightning populates. where in your script bitcoin should only scale once lightning has achieved mass adoption of scale of users


however people need to be aware lightning gets worse the more people adopt it. and bitcoin devs should actually try to scale bitcoin while their sub-employee devs try a different subnetwork design model

you however love the middle-man model of fee taking. thus you want lightning to grow even at the risk of users security

and yes i know your angry that i ruin your sales pitch each time. but i usually laugh at you. and find it nice when you actually for once start to sound rational and start to speak of the flaws and limits. its just a shame you are still swaying towards the promised land recruitment scheme rather than the user risk awareness support

these memes are being put into blocks by pools that love cheap spam
this one for instance is 122kb of dead weight. but only paying 0.5sat/byte ($13 for 122kb)
https://www.blockchain.com/explorer/transactions/btc/d6537aa2e01e5cb5532ff30ba4401986ba9b7247f5e772f68a23fac5eca2d098

here is one that is 3.9mb of dead weight and paid NO FEE
https://www.blockchain.com/explorer/transactions/btc/0301e0480b374b32851a9462db29dc19fe830a7f7d7a88b81612b9d42099c0ae

an average block has about 2000tx. is about 1.3mb in size and pays about 0.1x in fees

however there are some blocks that contain lots of deadweight memes
where the fee is far less but the total size of block is over 3mb
such as block 779272 with only 427 tx and only paying a total block fee of 0.02891196


taproot was suppose to promise "one signature length" witness weight max..
(the idea was to make multisig less bloaty)

here is the thing. as soon as taproot got activated (business sponsored request for taproot) sipa then retired and relinquished his github privileges. the other core devs are now unsure what to do so playing party games of saying nothing can be done..
yep the remaining lead maintainers of core have the coding power but dont/cant use it due to how much cludge they would have to undo now. without the guy that implemented it to consult

however the solution is simple.
simply changing the "upto wight(4mb)" they can say that taproot is upto 64-80byte(one signature length)
and it does not break "backward" nodes. because a taproot if only 80byte witness is still with the upto 4mb status of current acceptance parameters. thus no harm to the network. but does stop future bloat

notice how doomad suddenly now wants to sound a few IQ points higher then last month

he is admitting
there is a liquidity limit where it only works well on small amounts
admitting when he wants channels open for a year its only use is coffee/bagal utility
admits the security flaws exist

but one thing he keeps sliding into is his utopian script of being "on top"

heres a tech lesson
lets use internet systems
a top level domain is a main network director. then there are sub domains for certain services
lightning and L2 are sub networks not "top networks"

and as for me talking about large payments.
well its the lightning adoration brigade that call lightning a solution for bitcoiners.. rather than a niche for Bengalese or begals

bitcoin works for all amounts. so anything trying to replace it or "solve it" should do the same.. lightning does not do the same  or solve it. it is a niche service for small purchase items
things doomad does not want to see happen on bitcoin

i know you have not used lightning. but before shouting utopian dreams and telling people all thats needed is patience and wait for growth.. please actually try running scenarios

heres one for you
you say one work around is to use more channels to "split payments"
well if people have say average of $1000.. and cant push through $1000 around a network due to many reasons

if everyone then splits that $1000 into 4 channels of $250
guess what.. everyone is then in the same boat of now not being able to move $250 around the network because everyone has divided the max liquidity
where some channels on routes are unbalanced

lightning will not be used by someone that wants to move whole bitcoins or multiple bitcoins
so its not a solution for everyone and unless you have multiple channels when one route fails you end up needing more balance per channel then you intend to spend

right now it has a
100% success at 0.000020 BTC (~$0.45)
95% success at   0.000273 BTC (~$6.11)
75% success at   0.005000 BTC (~$112)
50% success at   0.020000 BTC (~$448)
25% success at   0.050000 BTC (~$1120)
5% success at     0.168867 BTC (~$3780)
1% success at     1.000000 BTC (~$22300)

its not about how many people are:
interested
making them
selling them
buying them

its about how many crap memes are being bloated into a block by a small idiot group

there have been examples where one person has put in over 10,000 crap memes into the blockchain. and its that bloat in of itself that is causing problems. it doesnt matter if other people then trade it or price it or any other worthless social stuff.. its that 1 person being capable of adding between 3GB (0.3mb meme*10000) to 39gb (3.9mb*10000) all by themself
in less than a couple months

there are people that can take an image. EG a monkey
and have a algo that can change
the background by 10 colours
eyes by 10 colours (100 variations so far)
mouth positions by 10 expressions (1000 variations so far)
ear size/shape or face direction by 10 (10000 variations)

and produce said stockpile of images in minutes
and then put upto 10 of them per block to fill a block
with a stockpile to keep repeating for upto 1000 blocks (a week shortest time)

and then repeat with a new animal each week

codebear. there are more flaws then you know of

lightning is not the solution for everyones spending habits
there will ALWAYS be a liquidity issues. and it will get WORSE the more populated it gets..
thats just basic math you can work out on a spreadsheet of running scenarios


lightnings development model has flaws when it comes to scaling offchain

liquid and lightning are products of blockstream (brink/chain code lab are just daughter companies of blockstream)
the main core devs have a roadmap designed by the blockstream devs
the same devs are also the main moderators of all development discussions
heck they even are the main merge privilege devs of cores github and also the github supervises that delete and ban any Nacks and critique/scrutiny that opposes the core roadmap

the real reason devs move to other networks like ethereum is because core has become a central point of failure. they have become too much in the style of god-mode of the bitcoin ecosystem
is there any surprise the same period sipa removes himself from blockstream he loses his maintainer status
is there any surprise the same period glowzo gets hired by the same group(brink) she gets given merge/maintainer privileges

any surprise achowe has moderator status of multiple dev discussion points, and is recently been trying to enclose github moderation with the small amount of leaders as controllers. and has been self pushing his own merges
(basically a HUGE lack of independent review)

yep when less than 8 devs are circle jerking each other and deleting, removing and banning anyone that opposes them.. shows core have gone far too central.. even their last lead maintainer has been saying so

as for their roadmap of delaying onchain scaling with the "be patient while we try lightning"
its been stall tactics waiting now for 6+ years

lightning has flaws even the lightning devs cant solve. but the sponsored/paid dev deals are to not work onchain to scale onchain and instead create subnetworks so middlemen can profit from users payments with a subteam paid by the same groups sponsors

lightning is not designed for easy user access, its for services access to gain/recruit/offramp people away from bitcoin and profit from them

lightning is just messing around with unconfirmed payments. not settled


..
there will be future subnetworks that are not designed like lightning that will populate and work as prescribed. but everyone is too much stuck in a "wait and see" and fears breaking away from the roadmap sponsors until their sponsored contract term is over

its simple
a guy makes 1 meme and tries to sell it to himself for XX to set a price he thinks an idiot will pay
..they dont pay
so then he thinks if he caan sell 10,000 similar images for 0.00X each he can then make the same total

meanwhile what he is doing is bloating up the space which could have been used for normal payments

as for others saying "it will just go away lets do nothing. if in doubt just pay more to scare them away"

the actual result is what larry just linked. people dont just go away after dropping 1 image that doesnt sell.. instead they multiply up and start throwing in thousands of images

as for the "do nothing" request of others. well sooner or later more abuse becomes more abuse. thus HOPING it will go away doesnt happen

bitcoin is code. it sets rules trying to suggest to not use code or set rules and instead have a HOPE network goes against all logic

bitcoin is not based on hope system
its based on a coded rule system of united consent.
trying to tell people walk away, dont do anything, dont try to stop bad things. is not the way to go

idiots say people and protocols cant identify spam. and a fee mechanism of 'punish everyone' by making every pay more is the only option
.. they are wrong

spam is identifiable,
repeatedly spending value every block = spam
adding in memes into a financial network = spam
having a crap tonne of outputs with sat-dust amounts = spam

its those types of transactions that should have fee multipliers in them. not everyone in general
and yes if they can make legacy end up costing 4x more.. then yes they can punish certain transactions more than others

"good enough" for whom.. since when?
you do know that a third of the worlds hourly minimum wage is below a tx fee currently.. right?

do you really think that paying an hour of labour to move money is "good enough"
im british. but even i can see outside of my local expectation and think about international concerns of an international currency

anyway. lets see if things really have got better or worse since segwit..


2016(pre segwit) the average btc was ~$450
meaning 0.00000100 was  $0.00045
so an average 2in 2out tx (374byte) at 100 sat/byte =$0.1683

2022(pre ordinal) the average btc was ~$17000
meaning 0.00000005 was  $0.00085
meaning 0.00000010 was  $0.0017
 the average transaction size was 650bytes
at 5sat/byte was $0.5525
at 10sat/byte was $1.105

the data/stats for 2022 show the average transaction cost for 2022 was more like $1.17
not 55c nor 17cents
..
as for saying
"just pay more join the fee war"
"just wait longer, upto a couple days for confirm"
"just wait for weekends to make a payment"

are all silly delay, excuses to not get the fee's sorted and the transactions per block sorted. by instead saying "yea dont use bitcoin as much or be prepared to wait or pay more"

those silly excuses are not good to tell people to do in a payment system

especially when its ethos is a payment system for the unbanked whereby the unbanked population see $1 as many hours of minimum wage

---

the solution is not "pay more".. "wait longer".. "use another network"

the solution is:
leaner transactions
fee mechanism that punishes the spammers not the lean/genuine spenders
remove the byte-miscounting cludge and open the 4mb for genuine payment data not dead 'weight'

result is more genuine transaction payments per block. meaning people pay less per tx but more get access per block

nope

bytes are actual real bytes of the full transaction
then
vbytes change this using cludgy code to give:
a. the entire legacy transaction a 4x meaning its total size is not in bytes but 'weight' of 4x of bytes
b. segwit get multiplied differently

(remember byte are bytes.. the international standard of measuring data!
the weight crap is a dev politic implemented cludge math of silly miscalculation.. its not division or discount of byte, its instead multiplication/premium of byte)

a better/fun visualisation

https://txstreet.com/v/btc

you can see southpark characters. the bigger their head the bigger the bloat is of a tx
pending