pull down to refresh
205 sats \ 4 replies \ @2minutebitcoin OP 4 Oct \ parent \ on: Has anyone seriously analyzed the Security Budget concern? bitcoin
Good website, what part addresses the security budget? I only found one link "“Block rewards will stop in the future and Bitcoin will lose all security” (safehodl)" and it doesn't work - https://safehodl.github.io/failure/#block-rewards-will-stop
Finding it via the web archive (https://web.archive.org/web/20240808135354/https://safehodl.github.io/failure/#block-rewards-will-stop) shows this:
-
There is time, I'm not saying it's a problem tomorrow. But it's not plenty of time either. The moment the budget starts declining it needs to begin being addressed. It's not like a solution (especially one that changes consensus) will be merged in 2 years...
-
Fees have not been increasing in sat terms. In fact, a recent Core change lowered the minimum sat per vbyte. In USD terms they have increased (because BTC appreciated), but not materially.
-
Sure, in theory fees should rise. In practice, this hasn't happened (for whatever reason). It's idiotic to keep faith that it'll somehow solve itself through fees when reality is showing you the hard opposite
So far, I haven't seen any convincing counter argument. Care to provide any?
just imagine you in 2140 being stardust... do you really care about blockspace when you are stardust?
reply
Reposting my answer to the same question earlier this week:
Maybe we'll have to change our expectations for acceptable number of confirmations, maybe nothing changes. I think things will not change significantly for users. Fees now already reflect how long you are willing to wait to reach an acceptable level of finality. If we want faster finality we will pay more to miners, if not we'll pay less.
reply
use LN. Have you heard about that?
reply
stackers have outlawed this. turn on wild west mode in your /settings to see outlawed content.