1/ Time to catch up!
The mempool cleared 6+ sat/vB multiple times this week. This morning, 4 sat/vB can get you in the next block. Expect to see lots of single-digit feerates in the coming weeks!

Why?—Blockspace demand has tuned back with the recent price drop…

2/ …even though the recent miner migration has reduced the network's hashrate to less than 130 EH/s—brutally undershooting the difficulty equivalent of 179 EH/s.
In addition to the low blockspace demand, we are expecting a difficulty adjustment of about –16% in 59 blocks.
3/ Given the low blockspace demand and about 20% more blocks than the past two weeks, there is a chance that we see the mempool clear completely in the coming difficulty period for the first time since December 15th, …
4/4 …right as we also expect Taproot activation to lock-in.

Safe travels everyone, and see you in Miami!

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Murch 🥕🟩

Murch 🥕🟩 Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @murchandamus

18 May
@Mario_Gibney 1/ Yeah, lemme try to draw it out. Let's assume it takes 6s for a block to reach other miners and compare 60s vs 600s block intervals for miners with 5% vs 30% of the hashrate. 6s is roughly the situation after Compact Blocks: dsn.kastel.kit.edu bitcoin/#propagation
@Mario_Gibney 2/ The propagation delay is both an advantage and disadvantage: it gives the author a headstart for the next block, but also gives time for a competing block to emerge which may oust the author's block. Let's assume half the remaining HR works on the competing block.
@Mario_Gibney 3/ We can calculate the chance of finding one or more blocks in a time interval by starting with 100% and deducting the chance of finding 0 blocks. The chance to find 0 blocks in a time frame where we'd expect λ blocks is `p(0|λ) = exp(-λ)*(λ^0)/(0!) = exp(-λ)*1/1 = exp(-λ)`.
Read 16 tweets
19 Feb
Default mempools purging txs < 6.0 sat/vB.

Since a full mempool seems to be the new normal, at least temporarily. What can _businesses_ do to lower their operation costs?

The following is mostly picked from blog.bitgo.com/utxo-managemen… if you prefer long form.


1) Batch payments
You get a lot of withdrawal requests? Instead of paying each out separately, save up to 80% in fees by batching multiple payments into one transaction. It also makes UTXO management much easier!

bitcointechtalk.com/saving-up-to-8… 2/
2) Consolidate deposits
You're still getting tons of deposits and have to perform withdrawals. By funding withdrawals only with bigger UTXOs and consolidating smaller UTXOs at a lower feerate than your withdrawal transactions, you can save a ton of fees. 3/
Read 11 tweets
24 Oct 20
@CryptoStorm3 @ChartsBtc Each transaction offers miners a small amount of bitcoins to incentivize confirmation. Blocks are limited to 4M weight units, so miners cannot include everything that is waiting. Naturally, they choose the transactions that pay the highest fee per weight unit to maximize revenue.
@CryptoStorm3 @ChartsBtc Since a block is limited in size, and the block interval self-regulates to be roughly constant, the throughput of transaction data is limited.
OTOH, the amount of transactions that get submitted to the network is flexible.
@CryptoStorm3 @ChartsBtc Especially, when the price makes big swings, people get excited and want to participate in the market. As a precept in Bitcoin is to be your own bank and control your funds directly, a lot of people do not keep funds on their exchange accounts but in their own wallets.
Read 16 tweets
22 Oct 20
Mempool depth is still on the rise with all fee bands growing.
If we were headed into a major fee event, the #btc ecosystem would be much better prepared than in 2017. Native segwit is on the verge of wide adoption, opt-in RBF is right there for anyone that wants thrifty quick confirmations, LN maturity is coming along nicely, which…
… could at least serve as a valve for some smaller payments even when Wumbo seems a bit daunting still.

If you aren't working on all of these, you might want to consider to.
Read 7 tweets
23 Mar 19
@giacomozucco @CarstenBKK @BlueDelta0 @StopAndDecrypt Alright, so our threat model is a widespread effort to change the protocol rules with support of a majority hashing attack. Presumably this is incompatible with existing network rules as enforced by fully validating nodes, but compatible with thin clients.
@giacomozucco @CarstenBKK @BlueDelta0 @StopAndDecrypt a) A vast majority of FN oppose this protocol change. Attackers are banned by their peers, blocks don't propagate, most thin clients never see the blocks. Affected scrutinizing thin client discovers changed rules when first valid block is found, if it has at least 1 honest peer.
@giacomozucco @CarstenBKK @BlueDelta0 @StopAndDecrypt b) Significant count of FN support protocol change. FN topology decouples, some Scrutinizing Thin Clients (STC) are eclipsed by attack. STC will at the latest fully validate the first block that includes any transaction that concerns them. 1) Discovers invalid block if rule...
Read 10 tweets
22 Mar 19
@giacomozucco @CarstenBKK @BlueDelta0 @StopAndDecrypt Maybe I'm missing something, but current thin client implementations either rely on a trusted server or connect to multiple nodes. So, you'd not only need to be served a fake block, but also get verification by other nodes to follow it. That means you need to be sybilled.
@giacomozucco @CarstenBKK @BlueDelta0 @StopAndDecrypt BIP157 done right would first gather multiple filter fingerprints and compare them, then download the full filter if they agree. If they disagree, the would need to be back-off validation procedures. I don't see why such a validation couldn't include parsing the full block.
@giacomozucco @CarstenBKK @BlueDelta0 @StopAndDecrypt Obviously, a thin client doesn't have the full UTXO set, but many other rules could be checked on a single block. This would significantly reduce the attack surface and susceptibility to accepting chain tips with protocol changes.
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!