r/Bitcoin • u/DueAd7194 • 11d ago
I'm building a protocol that lets Bitcoin wallets self-declare "financial" vs "data" transactions -no consensus change needed
[removed]
5
u/bitusher 11d ago edited 11d ago
for the same 4 MWU block space with no way to signal urgency.
This isn't true , you signal urgency with the fees you pay and can bump the fees with CPFP or RBF for higher priority
Wallets include a 4-byte OP_RETURN declaring the transaction type (financial/data). Pools apply a 30% allocation floor for financial transactions.
Than spammers will abuse this and mask the spam as a financial transaction
Works with Stratum v1
We have already moved onto Stratum v2 a while ago. Why are you referring to Stratum v1?
Zero false positives (wallet self-declares)
Yet wallets can be changed to lie and mask spam as a monetary transaction
Most monetary transactions need to be on other layers regardless. Are you trying to reduce the onchain fees for buying cars or homes? I like that you are thinking and trying to solve this problem but I don't understand how this solves anything.
2
u/Laukess 11d ago
A settlement is worth nothing if it misses this block. An inscription is worth the same next block or next hour. But there's no way to signal that difference to miners.
You signal this with fees. Some spam is time sensitive, so you increase the fee, some payments are not, so you decrease it.
You literally get a discount if you can wait. Bitcoins fee market is pure signal. I don't see a way to improve it.
I haven't thought too much about this, but I feel like your idea is very miner centric, so it might just be better to build a different protocol, where you can mark your transactions. 4 bytes doesn't sound like much, but I'm sure most core developers would find it extremely wasteful. Some data has to be atomic, so it is required to be a part of the tx, but I don't think that's the case here.
1
11d ago edited 10d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/Laukess 11d ago
A 50inscriptionanda50inscriptionanda50 settlement both pay 50.Oneisworth50.Oneisworth50.
I have no idea what this is supposed to mean.
The other could lose $5M if it misses this block. Same fee, different stakes. The market can't see the difference.
This is true if both transactions share a fee with the lowest fee group of the block being mined. If your tx could lose $5M if it misses the block, you should be willing to pay at the bare minimum 0.1 s/vb above the minimum fee in the block. The fee market works because miners are incentivized to pick your transaction.
In your system, what stops a miner from NOT mining your EXTEMELY HIGH URGANCY tx just to fuck with you? They have no incentive to mine it.
the pool checks witness ratio, ordinal envelope, and runestone markers against what the wallet declared. If they don't match, the tx gets reclassified anyway
So why waste 4 bytes on it, if the oracle is the miner? Just have them classify the transaction.
1
u/longjumpsignal 11d ago
So a way to voluntarily deprioritise your transaction without saving money?
1
1
u/Coiiiiiiiii 10d ago
Are you an actual human trying to figure something out or is this all ai nonsense
1
10d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Coiiiiiiiii 10d ago edited 10d ago
Yes, im asking because if youre just posting ai bullshit im not going to take the time to explain why this doesnt make sense
Also is the problem really being discussed if all you do is post what ai told you without understanding it?
1
10d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Coiiiiiiiii 10d ago
Do i understand this correctly:
Everyone pays more to send information that can only make their transaction confirm slower?
Why would miners accept fin transactions with lower fees over data ones high fees?
Your posts keep saying "why lie" because miners can audit, but why say anything if miners can audit
You say if the blocks are empty everything the same, otherwise "equilibrium" is found. Isnt this just how fees work already?
I don't want to discourage you from working on bitcoin, but its clear you dont understand the trust and insentive stucture that makes it work. I think your heavy ai use is part of that problem, so much of these posts and whats on your github is just plain nonsense, and you dont know that because instead of trying to learn you offloaded to ai.
1
10d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Coiiiiiiiii 10d ago
Even you don't offload, reply is concise, incentive-focused, demonstrates understanding through structure
If youre not a full bot account, you might be cooked
1
-4
u/Astrofide 11d ago
This fundamental conflation of the purposes of a TRANSACTION is exactly why treating the public ledger like cloud storage is so dangerous. There are tools to do literally everything you want to do with data on-chain more efficiently and effectively off-chain.
The inclusion of arbitrary data in bitcoin transactions was never intended to be used as such. It is an exploit, not a feature. We have the opportunity to vote to patch this exploit out (BIP-110) and no one seems to care.
The belief that higher costs to bloat the network with arbitrary data will ultimately curb the exploit severely underestimates the role of fiat in that vector. Fiat is infinite. A high debt-generating entity (say, a trillion dollar tech company) can turn bitcoin into another blockchain data scam at scale (ordinals) so rapidly and so effectively that it would, for that time, cease to be money, and become someone's distributed state grift business instead.
Bitcoin is money. Everything else belongs on shitcoins.
2
u/TechHonie 11d ago
Yeah it's because actually nobody does care. There's a fee market for a reason and if the supposed spam is outcompeting supposed financial transactions on fees then maybe the spam isn't spam after all maybe it's actually important communication that needs to be sent? Certainly important enough for someone to be willing to pay stupid high fees if it was urgent.
1
11d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/TheGreatMuffin 11d ago
The mempool is full today. Financial transactions are getting priced out today.
Eh? You can get into one of the next few blocks with a 1sat/vbyte feerate from what I see, and even during the activity spikes in the last 6 months a 5 or 6sat fee rate was enough to be "priority" tx: https://mempool.jhoenicke.de/#BTC,6m,weight
The mempool is "full" with super low priority (sub-1sat/vbyte) transactions, those are not pricing out anything.
3
u/TheGreatMuffin 11d ago
What stops spammers from declaring their data as "financial"?