pull down to refresh

Bitcoin devs cheer block reconstruction stats, ignore security budget concernsprotos.com/bitcoin-devs-cheer-block-reconstruction-stats-ignore-security-budget-concerns/
360 sats \ 19 comments \ @0xbitcoiner 9h bitcoin
This morning, Bitcoin Core developers celebrated improved block reconstruction statistics for node operators while conveniently ignoring the reason for these statistics — the downward trend in fees for Bitcoin’s security budget.
Reacting with heart emojis and thumbs up to a green chart (@0xB10C) showing over 80% “successful compact block reconstructions without any requested transactions,” they conveniently omitted red trend lines of the fees that Bitcoin users pay for mining security which powered those green statistics.
Block reconstructions occur when a node requests additional information about transactions within a compact block.
Although compact blocks allow nodes to quickly relay valid bundles of transactions across the internet, the more frequently that nodes can reconstruct without extra, cumbersome transaction requests from their peers is a positive trend.
...read more at protos.com
write
preview
related posts
240 sats \ 17 replies \ @optimism 7h
There seems to be a bit of a disconnect between the cheering around technical achievements and the economic reality that surrounds it, yes.
But if I look at both the comments and the article, then there's also a disconnect there: if you want quick block reconstruction by already knowing all the txs in the block beforehand, then it is useful to know... all the txs that are mined in the block, beforehand.
This is why not tracking transactions that you could know of is self-defeating. Whereas not mining transactions you consider undesired, is only unwise from a profit-maximalist perspective.
Technically, you can create any rules you desire for inclusion in your block templates without unnecessarily limiting your mempool's contents. All it takes is taking a step back and realize that you can be spam hating and censorship hating at the same time. This is the challenge to all that seem to be polarizing themselves over something as retarded as BRC-20.
reply
0 sats \ 16 replies \ @sudonaka 6h
The core dev team is too centralized
Paychecks from same company
Work in same office
We need knots and a third major client implementation too
reply
223 sats \ 7 replies \ @TheCharlatan 3h
In my perception Bitcoin Core is the most decentralized it has ever been since the Gavin days.
reply
102 sats \ 6 replies \ @optimism 2h
I don't think that it matters, because the problem isn't actual decentralization, but an accusation of conspiracy. And that's impossible to defend against. All you can do is not be trapped into reacting to it in any way 1
But I don't think that the "3rd fork" idea that has recently been re-popularized (e.g. #1223880) is such a bad idea; it can help lift some of the pressure and spotlight off of current Bitcoin Core contributors.

Footnotes

  1. I have personally been in that situation - more than once - and I know very well that it truly sucks to have to let the punches land and not hit back in any way. It's also why I am an anon on SN and won't hesitate for a moment to burn and move on if I have to; I don't want to have to deal with that shit ever again on any other project than past ones I still, some days grudgingly, contribute to. ↩
reply
100 sats \ 4 replies \ @TheCharlatan 1h
Yeah, don't get me wrong, I am in favour of a future where different clients are in a mad max like standoff, constantly trying to out compete each other, optimising for different use cases and targetting different audiences. It's great to see people seriously thinking about this.
reply
0 sats \ 3 replies \ @optimism 1h
Yes! That would also be healthier than just all the pressure being on one repo.
reply
0 sats \ 2 replies \ @sudonaka 29m
The current core devs have only been there since about 2021 correct?
What are they responsible for in that time from the user’s perspective?
Inscriptions, forcing filter changes and now a 20% rebellion from the repo?
What is the track record that ya’ll are so eager to defend?
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @optimism 24m
Here is where you can see maintainers of Core.
view all 1 replies
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @sudonaka 27m
How is an “accusation of conspiracy” a problem if it isn’t true?
Are you saying it’s a problem that all users in Bitcoin don’t agree about policy?
reply
165 sats \ 7 replies \ @optimism 6h
Yes, it would be good to have a great, conservative implementation. Maybe libbitcoin can be that, maybe another fork of Core...
but that has literally nothing to do with what I just said.
reply
100 sats \ 6 replies \ @kepford 6h
You know what else! Water is wet! That's important too!
reply
66 sats \ 5 replies \ @optimism 5h
Well yes but that's annoying, especially when it rains and you just wanted to read the newspaper on a bench in the park.
So maybe, we can filter out the wetness from the water and make it dry. That would be much better.
reply
100 sats \ 4 replies \ @kepford 5h
If we don't filter out wetness I say rain is dead. Its game over. Wrap it up boys
reply
43 sats \ 3 replies \ @optimism 5h
Thinking of it, yes. I'm convinced that this is urgent and if we do nothing right away then before you know it people will abuse this wetness to flood homes.
#hardforkphysics
reply
100 sats \ 2 replies \ @kepford 5h
Dude, I already have a fix for this. Join my alternate dimension where we pretend that we should try to fix physics and ignore umbels and roofs.
view all 2 replies
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @nitter 9h
https://xcancel.com/glozow/status/1968310311221657809
reply