Some miners in Ocean have begun to use the priority algorithm of the currency age during the construction of the lock template using the data. Originally, Bitcoin Core originally selected transactions to include blocks based on what they had seen first in their Mempool. This logic was finally replaced by prioritizing older currencies, that is, he had been sitting about longer, over other coins. This eventually applied to a small portion of the block space, and then finally went completely in Segwit’s time. It still remains in Bitcoin Knots.
I can only speculate on the motives of the miners who do this, but given Ocean’s rhetoric, I can assume that it has something to do with prioritizing “financial” transactions over the others. Even if not, even if it is purely to help the owners of UTXO of small value, it is still so irrational.
You can divide blockspace as a miner as you want, and prioritize the request for transactions, however, you want within those partitions, but it does not change the fact that Blockspace is a fungible good that is valued in an open market. If criteria other than feerate are used to decide which transactions to include, leave money on the table. The only situation in which that would not be true is one in which these criteria were 1: 1 identical to the decision based on Feerrate, which would be a meaningless criterion.
The creation of a blockspace subsect Blockspace sent competitive pressures of “rate” according to any different criteria that is used, without any of that pressure creating increases in direct income for miners who use this new criterion.
The new blockspace subsection does not reduce the tariff pressure, it simply lets them earn less money and users who take advantage of this new transaction selection criteria subjected to different competitive pressures from which miners do not benefit directly.
He cannot hide from the reality that Blockspace is a good fungible price in the open market. You can accept that, or you can lose money. The only alternative is to try uselessly to censor the transactions classes that they do not like, and if it succeeds, it destroys a central property of Bitcoin in the process.
Mining remains decentralized, widely distributed with many small operators, is essential for Bitcoin censorship resistance. It is a shame to see signs like this of miners so small that they are economically irrational, since it has huge implications for their long -term success.
This article is a Carry. The opinions expressed are completely from the author and do not necessarily reflect those of BTC INC or Bitcoin magazine.