Enterprise (professional/enthusiast/uncle jim) nodes tend to run in a virtual machine environment (and/or in the cloud) where increasing storage size is as easy as updating a config or the storage automatically expands.

Additionally, people use their nodes with different "loadouts". Some may also have electrum or fulcrum index running alongside (adds 100-300GB). Some might be running mempool project locally (add some GBs). Some may be running other nodes like a Monero node on the same disk (adds about 300GB). It means not "everyone" will run out of space at the same time.

Sometimes miners can maximize revenue by (counterintuitively) including lower-fee txns.

Maybe those txns paid a fee "out of band" (like Mempool.space Accelerator). Or maybe those txns were involved in some MEV (Miner Extractable Value) scheme.

Additionally, not all miners' mempools are the same. Some mining pools run alternative BTC node implementations like Libre Bitcoin or Bitcoin Knots which have different mempool policies and therefore a miner may exclude a high paying tx that isn't in their mempool.

I thought the US wasn't selling its BTC?

Crazy how "big news" manages to stay out of the bitcoiner zeitgeist when its not bullish enough. Narrative vs reality.

Its also likely that many LN nodes would support both sides of the fork. At least at first...

Whats stopping you?

All the new ASIC models are three-phase (380V) which isn't even available in most residential circuits.

Stay Humble, Stack Sats

Surely there's something Zeus could add to expose the channels.db from within the app so people don't need to dig thru their phone's filesystem in the first place.

Also curious HOW op initiated the RBF. Does zeus let users footgun themselves like this? Or did op rbf from another wallet?

This is why many places of business require 3-6 block confirmations to render goods/services. However, as miners get more centralized, this should really be raised to 10-30 block confirmations, if you don't trust the miners to play nice.

For a malicious miner to cause a deep reorg, they would have to first "withhold" those blocks from the network.

Example:

Suppose Foundry was evil and wanted to reorg any chance they could get.

Suppose Foundry found a valid block at blockheight 900,000. Meaning, they found a nonce such that when combined with the previous block's hash (block 899,999) the resulting hash is below the difficulty target.

Instead of broadcasting block 900k, they hold it themselves and begin mining their next block on top of this withheld block 900k.

Now suppose some other (honest) miner found and broadcast their version of block 900k. All the nodes will accept this block. Suppose this block contained a tx of yours and you already received the goods/services you paid for.

Now suppose Foundry found block 900,001 but this block is only valid if you use Foundry's block 900k, not the block 900k that was accepted by the network.

Foundry can broadcast BOTH their withheld blocks and cause the original block 900k to be orphaned.

If your tx was "confirmed" in the honest block 900k, but does not exist in either of foundry's new blocks, then its like your tx never happened, but you still received the goods/services.

If any miner wants to be malicious and they have enough power (or get lucky) they could reorg blocks.

Here's a list of orphaned blocks: https://bitcoinchain.com/block_explorer/orphaned

If you think mining pools are too centralized, you should require more confirmations for your txns, when possible.

If you operate a LN node, you can set the min required blocks before a channel becomes active, for example.

If you operate an economic node (like a bank or business) you can require more confs before delivering the merchandise or crediting the customer's account.

Unfortunately, you cannot easily require more confirmations as a user requesting withdrawals from an exchange. Maybe your widthdrawl is included in a block that immediately gets reorged or orphaned. Your widthdrawl tx is no longer included in any block nor the mempools at this point. Your only recourse is to plea to the exchange and hope that they recognize the validity of the reorg and re-issue the widthdrawl tx in your favor.

Re-read page 6-8 of the white paper. Satoshi explains his reasoning and calculations.

In his examples, he estimated that IF the largest miner has 10% of hashrate, people should require 5-confs to reduce the probability that their transaction gets reorged to less than to 0.1%

A reorg happens when a miner is able to "undo" a block and replace it with multiple blocks which don't include your txn.

Foundry Pool regularly mines 6 blocks in a row. Foundry has approx 30% of hashrate today.

If Foundry wanted to be malicious, they clearly have enough hashrate to routinely reorg the chain.

So if we account for REALITY, satoshi would recommend requiring 24 block confirmations to reduce the probability of reorg to 0.1%.

If you start with high price then lower as you achieve scale, its a commodity product.

Or...

If you price low and raise as you achieve scale, its a luxury product.

If you compete on price, you're always competing with someone who has much lower costs than you. As a small biz, you gotta compete on something other than price to remain sustainable (be unique, be quality, be luxury)

The best luxury products can consistently raise their prices above CPI. This artificial scarcity can actually grow demand as fiat-minded consumers believe your garbage is a good investment.

Not necessarily. You're assuming that every watt of off-grid power is just a watt of grid power that would have otherwise been used.

Grid and off-grid are not perfect substitutes. Maybe they are close in Germany (I have no idea). But broadly speaking, not.

Industrial sites (bitcoin mines included) are often built near a power plant. They might even establish their own energy source that isn't grid connected.

Yeah, maybe if you live in Germany. But not if you live in near the equator.

Also, a lot of solar generation goes unmeasured because smaller installations are off-grid. Those figures shown for solar are likely only from larger-scale farms.

Energy consumption isn't the same as production. A lot of renewable (and nonrenewable) energy is produced that is never consumed, effectively stranded or wasted. One chart is confusing because its titled "consumption" but the chart axis measures "production".

Even the "obvious facts" don't include the whole story sometimes.

https://levels.io/projects/ Young solo serial tech entrepreneur

A true 10x dev. Just needs an allstar team and more focus to pull off something Great.

Zuck and Elon are no doubt geniuses, but its their ability to lead and delegate (not just their tech skills or IQ) that made their companies Great.

Don't hate the player, Hate the game. Your attention is priceless. Social media addiction is real.

Play dumb games, Win small prizes. Its not about the sats we won...

But the Coins we didn't even swing at because we were busy winning dumb games.

The SN team raised millions of american-flavored fiat dollars to pay devs and users (never forget, rewards is a marketing expense).

3 years later, SN still has less than 100 daily active users

So clearly, sweetening the rewards with investor money isn't working.

If you don't have a static IP but are still able to forward ports using a dynamic IP, then, when your IP changes, all connections will be dropped. Your node will reopen all outgoing connections using your new IP address. Unfortunately incoming connections will not be reopened and any remote nodes will have to wait for your node's new external IP address to be advertised again by your peers.

You can set a static IP on your LAN, but that does not necessarily mean that IP is publicly accessible.

To be maximally helpful for "the network", your node needs to broadcast an IP that anyone can connect.

Most residential Internet service does not include a public IP, rather your router is behind a carrier grade NAT, meaning you cannot forward ports.

Additionally, many Internet plans have data caps that make it "expensive" to sync a node from genesis quickly, let alone seed blocks to others.

That's how I understand it. Routing nodes would be incentivized to support all available transport layers as it increases the odds they'll help route a payment between peers which don't have the same transports enabled.

Most LN nodes are Tor-only. So the demand for anonymity layers seems strong. Additionally, clearnet is difficult/expensive to setup (especially if you don't have a dedicated-IP because you're behind the ISP's NAT).

The pleb noderunners deserve a "middleground" transport with some anonymity, easy to setup, and more performant.

Technically, you're right. But in practice most LN nodes that process the bulk of payments in the network are online near 24/7

An offline node (with no watchtower) is also vulnerable to being cheated by peers.

Similarly, it's not technically required for an i2p relay to always be online. Of course, it will only be usable (by yourself or others) if its online.

The biggest difference between i2p and Tor is that you don't have to run ANY server to access Tor. Just download a browser (run a local SOCKS5 proxy) and you'll be able to route traffic thru the network without helping to route other's traffic yourself. It's easy to get started with Tor, but you're sharing resources (relays) with hundreds/thousands of other users which can lead to poor performance or denial of service.

"require running always online server" -- probably not the best way to phrase it. Rather, using LN and i2p (directly) require running a server and most people will probably run that server 24/7

It is technically possible for hundreds of people to use someone else's i2p relay (instead of each running their own relay). But that's not "the norm" like it is in Tor.