- would also require you to have a use for a second transaction, within the same time.
It doesn’t contribute to miners getting incentivized to get specific transactions in blocks quickly. When you RBF (replace by fee) a transaction it “resets” the default 256 expiration time because it is a new transaction, so you could argue it does the opposite (you would give the miner even more time to process the transaction).
My points of why $250/month nodes or higher level hardware and tenure-extend time decreasing and tenure budget increasing are reasonable, essential and urgent:
1.The current Stacks nodes requirement is too low which caused Stacks effective TPS(effective TPS is measured by daily transactions including transfer and function call)is so small:
Stacks signer nodes run with 256MB RAM old computer, while ETH validators requirement is at least 32G RAM and 100Mbps bandwidth, and Solana validators requirement is 512G RAM and 1-10Gbps bandwidth which costs more than $3000/month.
Thus Stacks TPS < 0.5, ETH TPS : 12-15, Sol TPS:1200-2000
Solana has more than 100M txs per day and ETH has 1M txs each day, while Stacks is less than 10k.
https://x.com/bitrabbit_btc/status/1884523194897625152
2.Because of PoX, Stacks could never be decentralised like ETH or even not as Solana, Stacks has 5 miners and 43 signers, while Solana has 1400 validators, ETH has more than 12000 physical validators.
Coz Stacks inherit bitcoin finality and security, in the Trilemma, we have high security but sacrifice some decentralisation, thus we are ought to improve scalability and performance as much as possible.
3.In 2050, after 6 times bitcoin halve, bitcoin block reward has declined to 0.049 BTC, to maintain current proportional security, bitcoin transaction fees have to exceed 3 BTC/block or more.
We estimate BTC price in 2050 is $1M(it’s a fairly conservative assumption), which means Stacks miners single transaction fees of PoX on each bitcoin block will exceed $500, and the $500 fee doesn’t include the bidding BTC amount to Stacks signers, so every single Stacks miner will cost more than 500•144•30=$2.16M fees every month in 2050.
By contrast $250/month hardware is negligible.
4.The limited network capacity has caused many negative effects: All the applications on Stacks were dragged down by low network capacity, Stacks connot attract new users who get used to the high speed chains like Solana and Sui, and old users keep leaving, also without high throughput, DEFI activities based on sBTC connot thrive. Without high network capacity, all the good tendency like memecoin wave and even BTCfi of sBTC were broken on halfway. Also inactive on-chain activities and low market cap has resulted in emission plan changing and sBTC supply increasing plan carry-forward, it’s backward flywheel.
5.Once we achieve high throughput by increasing tenure budget and hardware requirements, we could enter the forward flywheel cycle:
•performance improving---->
•on-chain activities blooming and more active uers coming from Solana and ETH ---->
•STX market cap rising —>
•Stacks miners and signers amounts increasing —>
•sBTC supply increasing —>
•BTCfi on Stacks based on sBTC thriving —>
•STX market cap rising —> next circle
6.There are multiple teams exploring different bitcoin L2 solutions, some new L2s may copy PoX and sBTC but implement the same expensive hardware and high block bonus strategy of Solana to reach high throughput, it’s a potential threat to Stacks in the future.If that happens, Stacks may lose its leading position.
about TPS, we still really don’t know which is the real capacity of Nakamoto with tenure extensions… the numbers only says that actually there is a very low activity… I’m sure with this settings we can reach higher TPS, but first we need users to interact with the chain…
About the hardware requirements I agree we could increase a bit, now you can run a node on rasPI, but my PI has better settings then 256MB ram… with current hardware we could easily rise to a min 4GB… a basic VPS server here in europe with 4GB ram, 120GB hd. 1GB speed, cost less then 10€/month and could be affordable by many ppl… 256Mb ram is a 90’s settings… But my final question is: how many users are running a node? if you have a startup or a company you can def afford the costs for better hardware.