OrangeSurf

What has changed since 2023, when pull 28130 was closed with the justification that “it's unlikely that Bitcoin Core is going to make any changes in regards to OP_RETURN”?

2025-05-06 01:47:02 UTC

I’m seeing lots of speculation around the financial motivations with regards to modifying OP_RETURN standard core policy.
In 2023 Peter Todd was transparent with his financial incentive ($1000 from Christopher Allen) for making pull request 28130, which was ultimately closed
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28130

2025-05-05 20:51:41 UTC

🎲 In 2014 Luke Dashjr described mining policies such as OP_RETURN size limits as not being a development topic, and suggested randomizing the default value.
https://gnusha.org/pi/bitcoindev/201411161724.19573.luke@dashjr.org/

2025-05-05 12:54:43 UTC

- reply

The conversation is still locked. My guess would be a push behind a new pull which doesn’t remove configuration options and only changes defaults

2025-05-05 02:22:40 UTC

The latest OP_RETURN war kicked off days prior to @npub1dwa…7c52 mempool edition. very sus. In Austin to get to the bottom of this 👀

2025-04-30 17:41:36 UTC

- reply

lol wut

2025-04-30 12:32:14 UTC

- reply

The legend didn't render correctly
https://blossom.primal.net/7c315d9b2ab8bab17e645f2737af639a067a63f28e40344acc49bef07cfbced9.png

2025-04-30 11:52:06 UTC

I've put some numbers together to help you determine whether the horse has already bolted regarding the use of bitcoin for non financial transactions.
49% the UTXO set is sub 1000 sat outputs
43% of transactions in the past 2 weeks had an OP_RETURN or were inscriptions.
https://blossom.primal.net/be33911765f6d7dc5f61fc459eb0415dc0966c9a113d33115e8b042b5b0f2612.png

2025-04-30 09:57:34 UTC

I think there is a strong argument to be made that even if you hold the opinion that bitcoin is for financial transactions, not arbitrary data storage, the figurative horse has bolted and efforts to close the stable door are currently futile. The argument looks like this.
1) There are people who want to encode arbitrary data, and are willing to pay for this. Systems are being developed which use arbitrary data pushes to enable bitcoin financial transactions to happen on sidechains/layers, blurring the line between financial transactions and the arbitrary data most people think about (jpegs on the blockchain).
2) Blocking arbitrary data at the relay layer is a sisypheancan task which nobody has succeeded to do for a prolonged period of time.
3) Even if successful the relay network can and will be trivially bypassed if block template builders wish to accept these transactions which encode arbitrary data. So you need template builders to be on board (the more the better).
4) The current block template builders are not likely to be on board, as it goes against their short-mid term financial incentives. This is because they are typically
(a) disengaged / ambivalent about bitcoin development (see radio silence regarding new soft fork discussions)
(b) In favour of any and all use of blockspace which will increase revenue (see the direct submission services, use of librerelay, prevalence of side chain mining)
(c) Of the opinion that their fiduciary responsibility is to construct blocks containing valid transactions which generate the highest possible revenue for their customers.
4) Even IF you were able to successfully persuade template builders to filter these transactions (say by decentralising template construction into the hands of more ideological lower time preference miners) there will be disagreement about what level of data encoding is acceptable, with some arguing that it is permissible in certain formats, and with hardliners arguing that all arbitrary data should be eliminated. The fragmentation will result in some arbitrary data being trivially pushed into the chain.
5) Even IF you were able to persuade the overwhelming majority of hashrate to reject arbitrary data inclusion it becomes difficult to reliably get transactions which clearly encode arbitrary data into blocks, the data would end up being encoded in a slightly less efficient manner with a 2x cost burden.
6) If 2x cost burden is sufficient to stop arbitrary data encoding then it can easily be priced out. If not, all that effort would be wasted because it wouldn't achieve the desired outcome.

2025-04-29 16:59:43 UTC

- reply

Knots does much more than a “simple” filter fix, and personally I don’t think it has enough reviewers to recommend it’s use

2025-04-29 13:21:04 UTC

A message to those on team #fixthefilters - your time would be better spent earning sats, which you can then use to fund development of a bitcoin node implementation which implements your desired configuration options. It's a cat and mouse game and the cat is currently asleep.
https://blossom.primal.net/a9c918c311720b1ce59254e5d4d592fec6638555bc5ac026b664d7c35d09f09f.png

2025-04-29 13:02:09 UTC

adding policy rules as a non mining node makes about as much difference as posting your opinion on the github pull request
both sides agree on this 😂

2025-04-29 09:32:50 UTC

- reply

Call for transparent development
In my opinion it is critical that bitcoin developers have an opportunity to verify that these nonstandard transactions don't pose DOS risks. With that in mind, it would be great to be able to perform benchmarking on these transactions prior to them being widely deployed on chain.
If you are building systems which use nonstandard transactions, I would love to discuss this with you!
I will post more about this in the future, if anything was unclear please comment below!
Note: There is also the set of transactions using upgrade hooks, where pretty much everyone benefits from not including certain transactions. Ideally we can ensure that there is no economic demand for these, because they make upgrades much easier.

2025-04-29 09:32:33 UTC

- reply

If economic demand for these transactions grows, it is reasonable to expect that some miners will relax the policy rules on their blockmaker node to earn this extra revenue.
These transactions won't relay over the standard bitcoin core p2p relay, so they will either be submitted directly to the miner (e.g. slipstream) or over an alternate relay path (e.g. opreturn bot using libre relay). Once mined they will be downloaded by all nodes in the network.
From my perspective, it's inevitable that systems will be built to get valid transactions to miners if they can't be relayed p2p. This has already happened, and will likely continue to happen as people develop systems which require the use of nonstandard transactions.

2025-04-29 09:32:14 UTC

- reply

Ideally the standard transactions & DOS transactions sets don't intersect, that's the intention of most policy rules.
Note: There are some who believe that policy rules should be used to guide the use of the permissionless network. Personally I think this is a folly when there is an economic incentive.
It's relatively simple to ensure that the standard transactions and known DOS transactions don't intersect because they are both well defined. It's harder to know whether the standard transactions and the unknown DOS transactions don't intersect, but we can reason about how we would construct a DOS transaction and then add some policy rules. For example, we can set a limit on the total size of a transaction, which will presumably mean some unknown DOS transactions are now non standard (and our node is protected).
So to be prudent we can add in lots of policy / standardness rules to protect us from unknown DOS transactions, which makes our node less vulnerable. The tradeoff is that in doing this we also make some safe (non DOS) transactions non standard. Arguably this is what happened over the years with bitcoin core, and for good reason.
This is a key point when considering policy rules. Our understanding of what transactions potentially result in a DOS risk is undoubtedly incomplete, and the widespread adoption of current bitcoin core standardness rules might be protecting the network more than we realise. But, having strict policy rules is also making some perfectly safe transactions non standard. For miners, these non standard, known non DOS transactions represent a safe source of extra revenue.
https://m.primal.net/QhEf.jpg

2025-04-29 09:31:40 UTC

- reply

Another subset of valid transactions are Denial of Service (DOS) transactions, which for one reason or another will cause a node to have a bad time. For example a DOS transasction might crash the node, or cause it to take a very long time to validate. We know about a number of DOS transactions, but presumably there are some DOS transactions which we don't yet know about. So we can add to our diagram two circles, one for all DOS transactions, and within that a smaller circle for the known DOS transactions.
https://m.primal.net/QhEe.jpg

2025-04-29 09:31:17 UTC

- reply

Next we have standard transactions, which are the transactions permitted into the mempool of a node according to it's policy rules.
The default policy rules which come packaged with the latest bitcoin core release are generally adopted by the network within a year. Each release with new policy rules will result in different set of standard transactions, so it's a moving target, but on any given node the rules are set at any given time.
Each node can configure it's policy rules as it sees fit (in theory, more on this later) and transactions must first pass consensus rules before considering policy. This means that there is no risk that using different policy rules will break consensus. Another way to say this is that standard transactions are a subset of valid transactions.
https://m.primal.net/QhEd.jpg

2025-04-29 09:30:50 UTC

- reply

Here is a quick introduction to what bitcoin policy rules are
We start with (consensus) valid transactions. These transactions abide by the bitcoin consensus rules which all nodes on the network enforce. For example, a non coinbase transaction can't spend more than the sum of the inputs.
https://m.primal.net/QhEb.jpg

2025-04-29 09:30:20 UTC

The recent pull request to bitcoin core made by peter todd (pull 32359) removes the code to enforce a policy limit on the size and number of OP_RETURN outputs. Additionally, he proposes the removal of the configuration options to allow node runners to modify the maximum size of data carrying transactions.

2025-04-28 19:41:20 UTC

If bitcoin core doesn’t have the functionality that you want you can build it, and share it with the world.
If other people share your views they can also run that code.

2025-04-25 09:35:40 UTC

- reply

Examples of users
The High-Ticket Merchant
Sells expensive goods with incoming funds straight into cold storage. Can’t (or won’t) leave a hot key online for CPFP, and asking the customer to bump the fee is awkward. An auto-accelerator guarantees confirmation so the product can ship without delay.
The Multisig Treasury Custodian
Manages a 3-of-5 vault for a family office. Gathering three signers to recreate an RBF transaction is slow and costly; the automated bump removes that operational friction.
The Air-Gapped Solo Stacker
Signs a single-sig transaction on an offline device just before boarding a long flight or going off-grid. With no way to reconnect, the auto-accelerator acts as a safety net if the initial fee estimate was too low.
Payroll Controller
Payroll is broadcast on Friday and the finance team is away for the weekend. If the mempool spikes, the auto-accelerator silently bumps the fee so employee pay doesn’t wait until Monday.

2025-04-25 07:39:51 UTC

You are making a transaction, you check mempool and set what seems like an appropriate fee, but then a new degen mint drops and your transaction gets buried. New transactions coming in push your transaction further back, and 24 hours later it's 10 blocks deep.
Fortunately you used Mempool Auto Accelerator with a 24h Time Delay trigger, and your transaction confirms in the next block.
I have 10 beta access spots, dm me.
https://blossom.primal.net/cb304169e7a2a3f54542da15f0695a1109f21a5ed9c3ee10fb75fc137f990576.png

2025-04-24 12:26:20 UTC

- reply

I guess they REALLY wanted a 1.0 BTC utxo, and no change
https://m.primal.net/Qbdo.png

2025-04-24 12:24:30 UTC

unusual 151 sat/vB tx
https://m.primal.net/Qbde.png
https://mempool.space/tx/53a2b07caeef425198cc394df8511087b181cf0ab64ad1c42dee3231b2730804

2025-04-23 18:18:37 UTC

- reply

Thanks for the mention!

2025-04-23 08:05:48 UTC

Thanks to DATUM the @nprofile…fd7j team have increased the number of entities finding blocks who constructed their own templates by 13 entities (11 if you assume Just Fo r X is one entity). You love to see it.
https://m.primal.net/QaLi.png
#nevent1q…vm9m

2025-04-23 07:19:44 UTC

If you are building something on bitcoin and use @nprofile…wnpf every day I want to hear from you, drop me a message.

2025-04-22 21:03:33 UTC

https://zap.stream/npub1qny3tkh0acurzla8x3zy4nhrjz5zd8l9sy9jys09umwng00manysew95gx

2025-04-22 15:44:36 UTC

- reply

Also excited to see
1) A renewed interest in transaction verification. Could this be the revival of the "server as a screen" concept the team presented in 2023?
> We want to give Bitkey customers easy ways to verify transaction details and other security-critical operations. First up is a software-driven feature we’ll bring to customers mid-year.
2) Hardware verification (on screen device?) and cold wallet config (FROST? orange.surf/bitkey-notes/)
> We’re also evaluating ways to provide even stronger transaction verification with hardware, and an optional cold wallet configuration for customers who don’t mind putting in a little more effort for more security.

2025-04-22 15:40:05 UTC

Very interested to learn more about the Privacy improvements. "Predicate blind signing" was mentioned previously by the team in their Oct 2024 post.
https://bitkey.build/building-in-the-open/
# Signing privacy
Predicate blind signing combines blind Schnorr signatures with zero-knowledge proofs that make assertions about transaction attributes. This allows the server to enforce signing policies without learning any identifying information about the transaction itself.
# Vault privacy
For transactions involving funds stored in the vault, the server only signs for the funds outside the vault, adding an extra layer of protection. To preserve privacy while proving funds exist, we use a zero-knowledge proof system similar to the proof-of-solvency approach utilized by exchanges. This method allows the app to prove to the server that sufficient funds exist for a transaction without revealing any specific details about wallet balances or transaction history.
#nevent1q…vcp7

2025-04-16 12:56:27 UTC

confused about the different mining options with
@OCEAN ? I've made a table to compare STRATUM (V1) with DATUM.
Will add in STRATUM V2 & DEMAND in the future.
http://poolcompare.orange.surf

2025-04-16 12:56:10 UTC

- reply

should be poolcompare.orange.surf

2025-04-16 12:54:53 UTC

confused about the different mining options with
@nprofile…fd7j ? I've made a table to compare STRATUM (V1) with DATUM.
Will add in STRATUM V2 & DEMAND in the future.
http://poolcomparison.orange.surf

2025-04-15 06:58:55 UTC

"solo mining" is currently confusing as a term because it's being used to mean different things by different people (often with an agenda).
Sovereign Mining: You select the transactions
Lotto Mining: You get the full block reward

2025-04-14 20:43:25 UTC

- reply

Looking forward to both

2025-04-14 20:40:56 UTC

Miners use picks, not hammers
🔨 -> ⛏️
https://mempool.space/mining

2025-04-14 11:03:07 UTC

Babylon unstaking continue to account for a significant proportion of all bitcoin transaction fees, even hitting 50% on 11th April.
https://m.primal.net/QPBd.png

2025-04-14 04:40:01 UTC

Blockspace is currently so cheap that a 4MvB inscription tx costs just 0.02 BTC
https://mempool.space/block/00000000000000000001a6878d5d21d40f53e4a331635658ee832f0194da761b

2025-04-12 18:39:36 UTC

- reply

Still very unclear how exactly people are getting tricked by these.
Which wallets expose prior transactions input addresses front and center?
With sparrow it’s 2 clicks, and not an obvious user flow

2025-04-12 15:27:53 UTC

At OP_NEXT Day 1 (2h15m) Ryan Rasmussen mentioned that
BitwiseInvest had to deal with dusting attacks shortly after BITB addresses were published.
I've noticed that many (22) of the wallet addresses which are no longer used have received address poisoning attack transactions.
example: https://mempool.space/address/bc1qky4xywjl59d9ge83pjdhqs7ge8d3wtwgd5edm3
https://m.primal.net/QNCZ.png

2025-04-08 11:49:18 UTC

Live view of @nprofile…pmyk announcing the release of v3.2
https://m.primal.net/QIXD.png

2025-04-08 10:27:40 UTC

- reply

Shout to all our Community and Enterprise sponsors - your financial support enables the team to keep shipping great new features for the community.
If your company benefits from Mempool consider supporting us today and get Enterprise API's, Accelerator Pro & more!
Send me a message - let's figure something out!

2025-04-08 10:26:51 UTC

The Mempool Open Source Project® v3.2.0 is here 🚀
Highlights:
- Support for v3 transactions
- Support for anchor outputs
- New UTXO bubble chart on the address page
- DATUM miner tags
- Tags to identify runestone messages and inscriptions
- Package broadcast
- Stratum job data visualizations
- Taproot multisig labels
- Transaction & PSBT preview feature
- Address poisoning detection
https://github.com/mempool/mempool/releases/tag/v3.2.0

2025-04-07 09:23:47 UTC

babylon unstaking transactions are accounting for a large proportion of all transaction fees, because they use a hard coded fee rate
https://m.primal.net/QHJD.png

2025-04-02 02:38:26 UTC

who could have predicted this
https://m.primal.net/QBNr.png

2025-04-01 01:58:17 UTC

Even with the mempool this empty, it's possible to get your transaction stuck for 1 hour by using 1 sat/vB instead of 1.1 sat/vB
https://m.primal.net/QABv.png

2025-03-30 18:23:38 UTC

@nprofile…fd7j just found two blocks in a row 👏
https://m.primal.net/PycK.png
https://mempool.space/block/0000000000000000000091b58fc226f000ac4836279249fc16f73111fa6a2cd6
https://mempool.space/block/000000000000000000007f7bc5ca5392c0fadf8791323cfeb149d6e98bb61ebe

2025-03-27 13:09:01 UTC

- reply

OS woz ere

2025-03-25 08:53:59 UTC

Great article
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cly4xe373p4o.amp

2025-03-24 21:21:33 UTC

People complain that Bitcoin is stagnant. Instead they should experiment with new exciting tech, like bark
https://docs.second.tech/getting-started/

2025-03-24 12:02:22 UTC

- reply

It would also be great to be able to set a URL for your own mempool instance when clicking "View on blockchain explorer"

2025-03-24 12:00:27 UTC

The reports of BTC20's death are greatly exaggerated
The majority of transactions made within the past 24 hours were BRC20 transactions

2025-03-23 22:12:42 UTC

- reply

Thanks for making such an awesome wallet! It would be great to have an option to just pay to unlock unlimited group wallets, without an account

2025-03-22 18:45:46 UTC

https://grid.orange.surf
https://m.primal.net/PpSR.jpg

2025-03-22 17:38:38 UTC

A third of all transactions in the past 30 days were BRC20

2025-03-22 12:26:37 UTC

few
{
"onchain_sat": 0,
"offchain_sat": 10000,
"pending_exit_sat": 0
}

2025-03-22 10:45:13 UTC

People were desperate to get into block 888888
https://m.primal.net/PouX.png
https://m.primal.net/PouV.png
https://m.primal.net/PouF.png

2025-03-21 16:19:11 UTC

- reply

is there any significance to the fact that in one direction there was no fee, but in the other direction there was a fee?

2025-03-21 14:06:58 UTC

- reply

https://hrf.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/CISA-Industry-Paper-V4.pdf

2025-03-19 13:42:30 UTC

- reply

Thanks @npub17q6…3few

2025-03-18 21:06:04 UTC

- reply

Tooling to take advantage of low cost blockspace.
I want my mobile wallet to alert me of abnormally cheap blockspace and (semi)automate the generation of utxo management transactions.

2025-03-18 20:56:02 UTC

- reply

viewers might find this of interest
https://orange.surf/bitkey-notes/

2025-03-18 18:54:35 UTC

👀 what if Bitkey used FROST to be compatible with other hardware wallets, while preserving the great recovery functionality
https://orange.surf/bitkey-notes/
https://m.primal.net/Pkcc.png

2025-03-17 16:02:31 UTC

Imagine this in the distant future. You buy a new bitcoin signing device which is open source (hardware & software). You stop by @nprofile…wds9 and pay 100 sats to use their chip verifier. It checks that your hardware wallet chips match the open source spec.
Sounds like science fiction, but check out this new talk by Bunnie Huang where he presents a technique for "seeing through silicon" - inspecting chips which are on circuitboards from the backside without removal.
https://youtu.be/8aLW4UEuJ_c?t=130

2025-03-17 15:00:31 UTC

- reply

https://m.primal.net/PjEV.jpg

2025-03-14 15:53:44 UTC

- reply

https://m.primal.net/PfkO.png

2025-03-14 12:52:12 UTC

- reply

wow that's a lot of links

2025-03-14 12:51:42 UTC

I just published a new read on Nostr!
Introducing a new interactive block visualisation tool - Grid
Check it out:
#naddr1qv…wfsg
https://blossom.primal.net/f5fea412459fafc7cdd773fc80c71f62e0c9afba7e90fff0465b8c7e874fafb1.png
https://highlighter.com/a/naddr1qvzqqqr4gupzq0w7aff8qz0ztjydxssj7ly65d35f7lwh54kngzwuallc0qw7um3qy88wumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmv9uqqk3mjd9jz6ar2wa5x6aqc09kyz

2025-03-14 12:23:43 UTC

Introducing a new interactive block data visualisation tool - Grid
https://orange.surf/grid/

2025-03-13 19:04:20 UTC

Rugged AF
#nevent1q…9n03

2025-03-13 19:03:49 UTC

- reply

Thank you for improving my feed immensely

2025-03-12 18:03:59 UTC

- reply

Nostr devs, please someone make a client with an inbuilt self custodial phoenix style lightning wallet

2025-03-12 17:49:17 UTC

Send this to your normie friends and family next time you find yourself spreading the good word of fiatjaf #note12ls…wl65

2025-03-11 17:06:19 UTC

"How important is the transparency aspect of this, and how far do we, as a country, want to go with our Bitcoin holdings? If we look at the El Salvador model, they have a page that shows exactly how much Bitcoin they hold at all times."
- Nick Neuman of @nprofile…qxkm on https://bitcoin.gob.sv
at the Bitcoin for America summit: https://youtu.be/vrkIUnmLYDI?t=11205

2025-03-11 12:40:51 UTC

Odell challenges the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve's foundation on seized assets as fundamentally contradicting Bitcoin's property rights principles.
While proposing that seized bitcoin should be legally burned to deter government confiscation, he acknowledges a silver lining: the reserve signals Bitcoin's legitimacy and creates an aligned incentive structure benefiting both holders and the state.
He warns against complacency and calls for continued vigilance in protecting the freedom to use Bitcoin without permission.
#naddr1qv…khg9

2025-03-10 14:49:25 UTC

- reply

Thanks for this crazy comment, Nic's article has been added

2025-03-10 12:31:23 UTC

So far the only one I've found was by Nic Carter, published December 20, 2024. I've added it to https://strategicbitcoinreserve.com/
#nevent1q…ffct

2025-03-10 12:20:53 UTC

Block Fee Rate Graph Update
https://m.primal.net/PalY.png

2025-03-10 12:01:46 UTC

Peter Schiff posted a bitcoin address on X yesterday.
A cursory inspection of this address could give the impression that Peter has a large amount of bitcoin, because this address has been an input in some large consolidations. Actually he posted his coinbase deposit address, and the subsequent spends from this address are just coinbase managing their utxo set - the large outputs are not his!
So be warned, posting an exchange deposit address publicly in this way exposes you to the risk that a mistaken thief thinks you have much more bitcoin than you actually do.
https://m.primal.net/PafK.png
https://m.primal.net/PafJ.png

2025-03-10 00:24:02 UTC

Remember that transaction where someone burned 83.5 BTC in fees.
The person claiming to have been hacked (who signed a proof) says they have been refunded
https://m.primal.net/PaKd.jpg

2025-03-09 18:34:34 UTC

- reply

Well that’s a start I guess

2025-03-09 16:32:07 UTC

What is the best long form criticism or caution regarding the strategic bitcoin reserve?

2025-03-09 16:29:18 UTC

Is there a nostr client for mobile (android and iOS) with an integrated self custodial lightning wallet?

2025-03-03 16:57:35 UTC

- reply

can confirm
https://m.primal.net/PSYi.png

2025-03-03 16:27:32 UTC

- reply

* correction
taproot 2of3 keypath is 59 vB cheaper (54%) than 2of3 segwit
taproot 2of3 scriptpath is 34 vB cheaper (31%) than 2of3 segwit

2025-03-03 16:25:42 UTC

- reply

Very nice user experience and way cheaper than a 2of3 Segwit!
For 1in1out tx, the the 2of3 Taproot keypath spend is only 99vB (59% cheaper than 2of3 Segwit) and the scriptpath spend is 124.25 (34% cheaper than 2of3 segwit)
Amazingly the 2of3 taproot keypath spend is even cheaper than singlesig Segwit spend (10% lower)
https://m.primal.net/PSXO.png

2025-02-26 15:49:45 UTC

- reply

PFHL-F83I

2025-02-05 21:23:19 UTC

- reply

Notice the inflection 4s before the end

2025-02-05 11:11:31 UTC

Bitcoin chain growth since 2009 📺
https://m.primal.net/ORPu.mp4

2025-02-05 09:12:32 UTC

Bitcoin block size distribution since 2009 📺
https://m.primal.net/ORJm.mp4

2025-02-04 21:25:22 UTC

- reply

Yep, there are a few new projects which take the same approach as inscriptions for adding large amounts of data via the witness - if they take off it could be back to a higher growth rate, but my guess is that green and blue are reasonable lower and upper bounds of what I expect

2025-02-04 21:09:53 UTC

- reply

Yeah consolidating has privacy tradeoffs. Many other ways to use blockspace, maybe you are making lightning channels, moving to multisig, or just making regular on chain payments with lower fees than lightning (for large spends)!

2025-02-04 21:07:37 UTC

Green, Blue or Red? https://image.nostr.build/3ec2aa05de77b7495bb552c6999498ce57956afded79b6fc2b1dded1ede78591.png

2025-02-04 18:43:29 UTC

- reply

When life gives you uncontested blockspace, make transactions

2025-02-04 14:25:27 UTC

- reply

Thanks for your support

2025-02-04 11:57:29 UTC

New research report just dropped.
https://research.mempool.space/block-size-report/

2025-02-03 10:22:51 UTC

- reply

Power to the people

2025-02-02 18:49:29 UTC

Q/ Wait how is the Mempool now 22 blocks deep!!?
A/ Well this one address (
Possibly “CoinCola” from a quick search) is associated with 926+ chunky consolidation transactions which are now in the mempool. Nature is healing.
https://mempool.space/address/1PM46U2c5LhkcQXnHwfwQU6V1y4F4L7Ct4