again tho I really wouldn’t call it a scalability problem. It’s a known trade off for rock solid security. The security will be way more important over the long run.
The sacrifice, less transactions per block, can be worked around (that’s what layer 2 are for)
This was already fought over years ago. The bitcoin cash fork is the result of some people insisting the block size needs to be increased (so more transactions can happen).
That experiment failed. Bitcoin cash has a fraction of the network, value, market cap, etc as bitcoin. In the long run, the security should be prioritized. It was the right decision.
Running an Umbrel node gets you a Bitcoin node and a Bitcoin Lightning Network Node. All the software is free. I run it on a NUC running Linux and it comes with many tools
One of those tools (apps) is your very own blockchain explorer, called Mempool
If you run an open-source Lightning wallet on your phone you can connect it to your own Umbrel node. Everything runs on TOR so your ISP cannot see or censor your traffic or transactions
I use BlueWallet
------------------
Anyway, I was so focused on the fees, I forgot that the angrytrader's lie has been exposed on several of the screenshots I posted
There were several blocks that have not been full, meaning all transactions on the mempool were included in the last 3 Bitcoin blocks (for example on this screenshot)
The current pending block is full and if you want to be included, you'll need to pay 3 satoshis/byte to bump someone out to the next block
Or just configure for 1 satoshi/byte and wait for 2 blocks
The exchanges were part of the problems in the past (ca 2017) when they were not sending transactions in batches and would have saved fees, too, plus there have been upgrades on the Bitcoin software that made it more efficient
https://blog.coinbase.com/coinbase-rolls-out-bitcoin-transaction-batching-5f6d09b8b045
-------------------
Don't trust but verify
PS: angrytrader is a poor, brokeass, loser angry trader,



