Personally, I don't like high fees too, but technically what could we actually do but wait for demand for block space to go down?
aww, the guy that joined the adoration of bloat brigade and the use subnetwork instead army, and supported his forum daddy in saying dont do anything about the bloat and let things pass unvalidated because high fees are a needed feature.., is now whinging that he has no clue what can be done to allow more transaction throughput, and to lower the fees, even though i been telling him for years exactly what can be done
so here is a gentle reminder:
1. make transactions leaner, where every byte counts and has a ruled purpose, with no validation bypasses to allow additional junk
2. change the landscape of whats allowed in a fully accessible 4mb block, instead of the 1mb:3mb wall segregation
3. SCALE(not leap) to a next size up of blockspace.. emphasis on SCALE not his forum daddy's story of leaping
if he wants to continue arguing that fee's are needed as a supplement to block rewards any time soon(next 20 years) then he really needs to look at what bitcoin is and realise even this week he is experiencing bitcoins deflationary nature which take care of the increasing costs of things like mining profitability, and many cycles(many 4 year periods) will continue this process for many cycles before fee's become significant need. and ontop of that having more transactions would allow block cumulative fee total to be substantial compared to limiting transaction counts so far to cause individual users to pay more
Personally, I don't like high fees too, but technically what could we actually do but wait for demand for block space to go down?
--Snip--
I forgot that what we could do is also FUD, gaslight, and spread disinformation to convince everyone who would listen that the Core Developers are deliberately keeping the blocks small because "reasons".
What ALL users of BitcoinTalk should simply do is read your trust-rating. You tricked many plebs like me before, and you will never trick us again frankandbeans.
oh the fud/misinformation which gmax told you i was spreading..
you mean the factual information i started from 2016 about how core were introducing a cludgy, rushed new set of transaction formats(segwits new subset of opcodes and lack of rules) that miscounted bytes, ignored bytes and bypassed validating bytes, where by it would allow junk data and people to publish 4mb of anything like books or images to the blockchain.. and even till 2019 gmax said what i was saying was a lie and segwit was not a bug... yet we all see now that the ordinal meme junk is real and proves my point... but hey you dont actually care about bugs and fixes, you just want to act like a victim and pretend there is no way to solve problems, suggesting people should put up with it and wait(stop using bitcoin) or use another network.
still is funny how you call it mis information to defend cores action, when ordinals meme junk exists in public and is undeniable, yet you still pretend what i said would happen didnt happen.. maybe try to learn about bitcoin and not learn what a core dev wants you to be a loyal faithful follower of, even if that religion goes against bitcoin immutable data
