pull down to refresh
20 sats \ 8 replies \ @028559d218 12h \ on: September OP_RETURN stats bitcoin
If they pay fees let them in.
The 'monetary' use case will by definition outpace and outspend the non-monetary use case by definition...
If it doesn't or can't then Bitcoin is fundamentally flawed somehow and we need to start over.
Where does your definition come from? AI hallucinations?
reply
So you think that if the spammers showed up... and the monetary users showed up...
Bitcoin's network would be more valuable to spammers than actual users?
reply
I asked about your definition. You replied without answering. Do you have anything to hide, perhaps?
reply
I think the definition (of Bitcoin 'the money') comes from common sense, no?
No I don't. Why do you ask?
reply
I think you are misleading. The question was about your definition that you referred to: "will by definition outpace and outspend the non-monetary use case by definition..." and not about definition of Bitcoin.
reply
How do nfts and ****coins on Bitcoin sustain themselves... if they have to pay high fees?
reply
Illogical, you think nfts and other crap can't sustain themselves because of high fees (cost) whereas Bitcoin could sustain itself despite high fees (cost).
Fees are there to differentiate among competing Bitcoin transactions (transfers). They are not there to differentiate between Bitcoin and crap of NFT/any other category.
The whole point is that your Bitcoin transaction should not compete with crap (like NFT) on Bitcoin. Learn more at: https://wtfhappenedinfeb2023.com/common-narratives-around-spam/high-fees-will-solve-spam
reply
llogical, you think nfts and other crap can't sustain themselves because of high fees (cost) whereas Bitcoin could sustain itself despite high fees (cost).
Yes and Yes.