reply on: Peter Wuille post about dropping OP_RETURN limit \ stacker news ~bitcoin

pull down to refresh

251 sats \ 8 replies \ @LibreHans 12 Sep \ parent \ on: Peter Wuille post about dropping OP_RETURN limit bitcoin

Argument from authority

@optimism didn't say Wuille is right because it's Wuille, he only asked if you disagree so vehemently with him, why do you run >50% of his code that he probably wrote based on the arguments you're disagreeing with?

0 sats \ 6 replies \ @optimism 12 Sep

Maybe you're right, but then, is it really nonsense? Or a different view from your own? For example, how do you estimate fee in the face of different miner policies?

120 sats \ 5 replies \ @LibreHans 12 Sep

The same way I've estimated fees since before the feature existed. And it doesn't matter if it's optimal or not anyway since we got RBF.

"You have to relay spam to have a computer give you economic advice for fees you can replace anyway" - really makes no sense.

0 sats \ 4 replies \ @optimism 12 Sep

The same way I've estimated fees since before the feature existed

"the feature" being estimatesmartfee?

How do you estimate then?

PS: you don't have to relay. Just have to have knowledge about it.

110 sats \ 3 replies \ @LibreHans 12 Sep

It seems like you're missing the point. How I personally estimate fees is irrelevant, the point is that it's not a computer science problem and that a computer can't solve it, and that it doesn't matter because of RBF anyway.

102 sats \ 2 replies \ @optimism 12 Sep

Oh, well, I'm sorry to be a noob. Apologies for asking questions.

200 sats \ 1 reply \ @LibreHans 12 Sep

There's no need to be snarky, I was trying to get us on the same level, but you don't have to if you don't want to.

100 sats \ 0 replies \ @optimism 12 Sep

So was I, hence the questions? After all, if you would share your methods, maybe I will learn something about fee estimation.