
What is this front end goose? I do a lot of work with PDFs, it seems you can only upload photos thru the maple front end, is that correct? This seems to have multiple file support.
đź”” This profile hasn't been claimed yet. If this is your Nostr profile, you can claim it.
EditWhat is this front end goose? I do a lot of work with PDFs, it seems you can only upload photos thru the maple front end, is that correct? This seems to have multiple file support.
Climb rocks. Ground yourself to the original chain. Challenge the mind, and challenge the body. Player versus Environment is the way.
Is this one of the better pods to listen to regarding maple? I’m very interested on making the switch over
Hmm, they really cause problems? That’s above my technical knowledge. I’m not talking about 4MB artificial blocks btw. I guess full isn’t the proper word to use. Yeah I like your idea. I’m not sure the technicalities of building a filter plugin, but we should try to explore a feasible path.
I agree with you completely, local policy filters can slow down the spread of undesirable transactions, and they do add “friction”, but said friction is not pegged to energy, unlike block fees. But ultimately, whatever makes it into a miner’s mempool is likely to be mined if fees suffice. At the end of the day, the only true spam filter is the cost of scarce blockspace in sats/vbyte. That’s where consensus kicks in: inefficient use of blockspace is punished when fees rise, and efficient use is rewarded. Over time, spam gets priced out, or spammers simply run out of sats to burn. To me, the only real “waste” in Bitcoin is an unfilled block. The most efficient data to embed in Bitcoin is monetary data obviously. But if someone pays the fee and a miner includes what others may call “spam,” it was clearly valuable enough to the sender to sacrifice scarce sats for that entry. Scarcity is the only ultimate filter for behavior in Bitcoin as scarcity enforces energy conservation. Knots vs. Core is the process of the network itself discovering what behavior persists when subjected to the hard wall of scarcity. Knots is a check on core for sure. Consensus and markets together reveal which use-cases survive, not preference or policy. This doesn’t mean we shouldn’t create a robust system for how individuals handle policy and relating mempool data. Again, it’s only my opinion. I do really enjoy the idea of removing filter from the devs and making it a plug in. This seems like the correct path.
Isn’t 21M the actual filter for “spam”? Not in terms of what is relayed between nodes, but what is actually written to the chain. It seems the mempool of the miners is really the only mempools that matter in regards to future blocks.
Trust the physicists anon!
21M is the filter on a long enough timeframe. If nodes don’t want to relay certain information, that is their policy and should be able to if desired. But when a valid block is mined, consensus rules state that they have no choice but to accept it or fork new consensus rules. Policy ≠Consensus
Longest chain of work is a bitch for integral path formation. I would say superpositin the uncertainty of the next future state between the smallest blocks of time (identical to the future state of Bitcoin before the next block is mined). In physics that unit is Planck time, which has never been measured. The smallest unit of time measured in physics I’ve been able to find is 1 zeptosecond (1 x 10^{-21} seconds) There are1.86 x 10^{22} Planck Blocks of time in 1 zeptosecond. In Bitcoin, if I spliced together a thousand or hundreds of thousands of blocks together into a singular “measurement”, I could show you the modern definition of Superpostion in Bitcoin; double spends and utxos existing in multiple states at once. Yet we know this is untrue because we can see the granularity of 1 block. It’s simply a measurement problem, we have never observed Planck Time.
Maybe some Bitcoin language will help. We live in a physical world where double-spends have never been observed. Conservation is absolute. Quantum theory, however, assumes the opposite: that a quantum can exist in multiple states at once, only later “collapsing” when measured. This is effectively allowing double-spends to exist across time. The mistake is that physicists have confused a measurement and information problem for a physical reality. Superposition is not infinite drift, it is the illusion created by incomplete resolution between discrete blocks of time (Planck Time).
Bitcoin Physicist Professional Engineer (Civil) Bitcoin = Quantum Computer