CSW
Feb 23, 2022
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1645617590519549?thread_ts=1645617590.519549&cid=C5131HKFX

https://t.me/CSW_Slack/4051

CSW
Feb 23, 2022
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1645617735183039

https://t.me/CSW_Slack/4053

A question

Where are "relay fees" mentioned in my White Paper?

Step one:
1) New transactions are broadcast to all nodes.

If a node gets a TX, it sends it.

If it has zero fees - it sends it

The node can choose to include a TX in a block or not if there are no fees

STOP trying to engineer markets - these ocur as an emergent state and all these collectivist BS ideas need to end

SImple statement.

I expect a race to the bottom as people keep stating - I will be pushing TAAL to have 50 sat fees by the end of the year and to move that lower next year. MAXIMUM

For a standard 1 in TX with one and change...

Data, will end as more, but that is for miners to FIGHT OUT

Note - TO FIGHT OUT, tooth and bone.

A race to as low as possible and utility rates

If this means 0.5% profit but 10 billion TPS - GOOD!

If you do not like competition, if you do not want lower fees and the consumer to benifit....

Leave.

BCH and BTC have places for people wanting to make and engineer controlled systems

Rubix cubes...

CSW
Feb 23, 2022
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1645617735183039

https://t.me/CSW_Slack/4053

CSW
Feb 23, 2022
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1645620494472599?thread_ts=1645620494.472599&cid=C5131HKFX

https://t.me/CSW_Slack/4055

Let me explain something to everyone about bitcoin. The protocol is fixed. There is a unilateral contract that was set in 2009 when the product was released. That contract has no provision for change. Rather, it has a promise of stability. While some of the codes that are currently disabled will not be re-enabled anytime soon others will be. None of this will impact any existing transaction now all that may exist in the future. But, you have no guarantee or promise of when some of the other codes that are not currently used will be implemented and you shouldn’t be developing anything that is based on them.

The operation of nodes is very simply defined in overview in section 5 of my White Paper. This is not negotiable. It does not matter that you don’t like it. It does not matter if you think it can be optimised in a better way or improved. That is it. Simplicity is actually a good thing in complex systems.

There is no consensus on block cap. Honestly, I’m getting tired of this and it should be what can be handled by the majority of nodes. That is by computational power. If the size of the blocks is too large for a node, this is capitalism and that node goes out of business. If you want to run a rasberrypie go to BTC.

In time... It will be an INTERESTING year

I won't say more for the moment

Welcome to another day in Bitcoin

CSW
Feb 23, 2022
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1645620494472599?thread_ts=1645620494.472599&cid=C5131HKFX

https://t.me/CSW_Slack/4055

CSW
Feb 23, 2022
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1645620836480089

https://t.me/CSW_Slack/4057

CSW
Feb 23, 2022
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1645620891257759?thread_ts=1645620891.257759&cid=C5131HKFX

https://t.me/CSW_Slack/4058

Block size is not part of the protocol.
If 51% of the network started mining petabyte blocks tomorrow, then that will be the new norm. They don’t need to talk to other nodes. If other nodes can’t keep up, so what?

Bitcoin is not a community project. It is a project based on a set protocol that communities can form around. This is an important distinction to understand. Like TCP, the bitcoin protocol is set. That is the nature of a protocol. If you are constantly changing something that is not an effective protocol.

Despite all of the arguments about how you need to change things and that the Internet is dynamic, TCP and UDP have not changed in 40 years. That is a protocol.

But yes, I've been saying the same thing. I have also tried to give people leeway to much. I keep hearing about community and how people need to be involved but the reality is that that's not the case.

People need to be able to build on top of Bitcoin.

For that, they need to know that the protocol will both scale and be fixed for at least the next 200 years

by 200 years am not kidding

that is the minimum time that it needs to be fixed

consequently, though I have said these things many times I'm going to have to make sure that it is more than understood and get rid of any dissension

the protocol is fixed and I've explained that this means that any transaction you make today will work 100 years from now without alteration and that you can sign anything that you can possibly ever think of or do any other form of transaction puzzle that is unimaginable and if you can have at work today, it will work in 100 years from now without any change

next, nodes are defined in my white paper

that white paper is authoritative

if you don't agree, don't work on bitcoin

I hope people work on bitcoin, but honestly I'm not interested in protocol developers. Bitcoin has a protocol. That protocol doesn't need to be changed and even if it did it's not going to

need people who will develop simplified Apis and methods to access the network

and then we need people who will develop applications

those people should not care or at least should not need to care that it is bitcoin and as I've said many times it should be treated as plumbing

CSW
Feb 23, 2022
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1645620891257759?thread_ts=1645620891.257759&cid=C5131HKFX

https://t.me/CSW_Slack/4058

CSW
Feb 23, 2022
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1645622968111309?thread_ts=1645622968.111309&cid=C5131HKFX

https://t.me/CSW_Slack/4060

What I will state very simply and make sure that people understand is that bitcoin is a legal contract system. There is a unilateral contract that pays miners. Those miners or nodes are paid money to conduct a service. If they don’t do the service, if they attempt to change the protocol or operate outside of the legal boundaries or think that they can do things that are not within the protocol, they are liable for any damages in contract and tort.

Double spend protection is not technical. Like most aspects of Bitcoin, it is a technical constraint linked to an economic condition. In this, if a node, any node does not relay a single transaction and this ends in a double spend, that node is 100% liable for the direct loss and ALL costs. Without execption.

If a 100 millin USD transaction is made with ZERO fees and your node does not relay it, and ANY node connected to you fails to get this and sees a double spend, your node is liable for the loss. The recipient of the double spend and come to you and you will need to pay.

That is how relay fees work

If you have one, you have a HUGE liability

UNLIMITED

Liability

to save SMALL amounts of money

Basically, the entire concept of a relay fee is a stupid idea

And, any miner not forwarding EVERY TX is a dumb fuck who wants to be put out of business.

You do not need to mine a zero fee tx... YOU DO NEED TO FORWARD it as a miner

Not mining and puttin git in a block is separate to not forwarding

Nodes Relay

They are Paid for this - they have a subsidy

CSW
Feb 23, 2022
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1645622968111309?thread_ts=1645622968.111309&cid=C5131HKFX

https://t.me/CSW_Slack/4060

CSW
Feb 23, 2022
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1645624023048749?thread_ts=1645624023.048749&cid=C5131HKFX

https://t.me/CSW_Slack/4062

There are 625,000,000 Sat in Subsidies.

That means, I am not paying miners to mine, I am SUBSIDISING Transactions.

That is a payment to nodes to accept zero fee or LOW fee TXs. It is NOT a payment to do nothing.

At 100 sat a TX, 6.25 Bitcoin a block is a PAYMENT for services, to have nodes include 6.25 million FREE TXs or 12.5 million TX at 50 SATS

If you are a miner, a node and you are taking the subsidy and you are NOT including a LOW of TXs, you are technically in a breach of contract.

Even at 500 SAT a tx, that means a lot of TXs need to be in a block FOR NOTHING

I do not think it should be NOTHING, I think it should be a lot lower

By lower, WAY WAY lower

A miner should be building knowing that fees will drop to 10 sat or lower.

And soon

By soon, 2 years

Or they should decide to forgoe the subsidy...

2140

CSW
Feb 23, 2022
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1645624023048749?thread_ts=1645624023.048749&cid=C5131HKFX

https://t.me/CSW_Slack/4062

CSW
Feb 23, 2022
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1645630312478729?thread_ts=1645630312.478729&cid=C5131HKFX

https://t.me/CSW_Slack/4064

CSW
Feb 23, 2022
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1645632091797109?thread_ts=1645632091.797109&cid=C5131HKFX

https://t.me/CSW_Slack/4065

CSW
Feb 23, 2022
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1645632091797109?thread_ts=1645632091.797109&cid=C5131HKFX

https://t.me/CSW_Slack/4065

Gizmodo & Wired
https://t.me/joinchat/SJQQOn2ZPdGwwtaZ

CSW
Feb 23, 2022
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1645649634252519?thread_ts=1645649634.252519&cid=C5131HKFX

https://t.me/CSW_Slack/4068

1 year target
1 million TPS

2 year target
25 million TPS

3 year target
500 million TPS

4 year target
5 billion TPS

5 years....

Not 50k

Fees...

Less

Every year

500 sat, meh

100... shit, but next step

50... better

10 Sat.... close

CSW
Feb 23, 2022
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1645649634252519?thread_ts=1645649634.252519&cid=C5131HKFX

https://t.me/CSW_Slack/4068

CSW
Feb 23, 2022
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1645649634252519?thread_ts=1645649634.252519&cid=C5131HKFX

https://t.me/CSW_Slack/4069

CSW
Feb 23, 2022
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1645653180479619?thread_ts=1645653180.479619&cid=C5131HKFX

https://t.me/CSW_Slack/4071

CSW
Feb 23, 2022
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1645653966721309?thread_ts=1645653966.721309&cid=C5131HKFX

https://t.me/CSW_Slack/4072