Exposing more coretard hypocrisy!!

[PepeLapiu]

So this is a discussion on X started by Retarded Pleb:
https://x.com/retardedpleb/status/2064781974464553311

Retarded Pleb wrote:

Miners who mined the last 25 BIP110 blocks have collectively lost 0.07 BTC in fees

So I replied: 0.07BTC is around $4600. Compare that to the block reward for those 25 blocks at 78.125BTC (or $5.14 million USD), those malware fees make up a ridiculously low amount of ~$184 USD per block, of less than 0.0089% of the total miner reward.

Of course, he had to reply to following retard logic:

Imagine how much they would have lost if the fees had been higher than 1 sat. RIP BIP110 miners

Now, if you are a dickpic.jpeg loving coretard, you probably 100% agree with this idea that malware makes up an important part of the miner subsidy. And that this would become more important in a high fee environment.

The problem with this retarded logic is that it directly contradict the core mantra that "the fees should be the only filter". Because that implies that higher fees would push malware assholes out of Bitcoin. Yet the user name 'Retarded Pleb' is basically exposing the core gaslighting bullshit about the fees being the filter.

Are higher fees going to make more miner profits for miners who fill their blocks with malware? Or are the higher fees going to push out all the malware assholes?

The problem with your retarded " security budget" mantra, is that it implies a permanent place on Bitcoin for malware assholes. All the while professing they will run away as soon as miner fees go up.

Cognitive dissonance at best, most likely retard gas lighting.

[DaveF]

Look Pepe is giving away free money. Since $1000 a week to him is nothing.
Miners work on very thin margins. So they have to get every sat they can.

But math is not your strong point, otherwise you could count to 52. Which is the number of days from this post until knots stops accepting blocks mined by miners that don't signal for 110. https://jlopp.github.io/knotzi-death-march/

Which as of now is 99% of the blocks mined.
You have 3 full signaling periods and about 75% of the one we are in now to get 50%+ of the hash rate.
It's not going to happen.

This is just knots stupidity thinking that anything close to that is going to happen.

-Dave

[PepeLapiu]

Look Pepe is giving away free money. Since $1000 a week to him is nothing.
Miners work on very thin margins. So they have to get every sat they can.

You clearly don't understand how difficulty adjustment works in relation to profitability.
If we doubled the miner reward, miners would profit individually, but only until the next difficulty adjustment.

And besides, we just saw a 50% price drop, which caused a massive profitability drop for miners. They didn't die, they are still around. I find it particularly suspicious that you would try to claim a 0.0089% drop in profitability would be unbearable when they just suffered a 50% drop in profitability.

But math is not your strong point, otherwise you could count to 52. Which is the number of days from this post until knots stops accepting blocks mined by miners that don't signal for 110. https://jlopp.github.io/knotzi-death-march/

Again with your stupid predictions as your main argument. You can't help but bring it up in every post and attempt to stir the discussion that way every single time. Because your predictions of BIP110 failure is are the only brittle argument you can cling to.

Which as of now is 99% of the blocks mined.
You have 3 full signaling periods and about 75% of the one we are in now to get 50%+ of the hash rate.
It's not going to happen.

Yawn.
We'll see.
BIP110 is the right thing to do as part of taking the reigns away from core. I wouldn't care if I were the only one running BIP110. It's the right thing to do.