More recently, out of band payments to miners have become popular again, allowing individuals to pay large pools for the inclusion of their transaction(s) using payments outside of the normal bitcoin transaction fee. This can create substantial MEVil but only if the out-of-band payment is offered directly to a single or group of miners. Any kind of out of band fee payment which is easily claimable by any miner does not contribute to MEVil-induced centralization, and thus open protocols for this are important. Further, while out of band fees have been commonly available on bitcoin before, they have never represented a substantial portion of miner revenue, and with technologies like Lightning and RBF (very slowly) becoming more popular in consumer bitcoin wallets, the need for out of band payments should further decrease.
-Finally, some individual coins on chain have developed collector value. Notably, coins freshly mined in coinbase outputs in certain blocks (especially after difficulty or block subsidy adjustments) have often been valued at higher than their Bitcoin amount. While this has negative implications on fungibility, the extraction of such additional value can also be considered a form of MEVil. After all, claiming this value may require additional investment in human capital to evaluate and participate in “rare sats” marketplaces. The long-term value of these collectors items remains unclear, and valuing them is, correctly, often considered antisocial by Bitcoiners who care about the long-term sustainability and performance of the bitcoin system. Luckily, such "rare sats" that (may) have material value only occur in very few blocks (currently those every 4 years after difficulty adjustments), reducing the total impact it can have on miners.
+Finally, some individual coins on chain have developed collector value. Notably, coins freshly mined in coinbase outputs in certain blocks (especially after difficulty or block subsidy adjustments) have often been valued at higher than their Bitcoin amount. While this has negative implications on fungibility, the extraction of such additional value can also be considered a form of MEVil. After all, claiming this value may require additional investment in human capital to evaluate and participate in “rare sats” marketplaces. The long-term value of these collectors items remains unclear, and valuing them is, correctly, often considered antisocial by Bitcoiners who care about the long-term sustainability and performance of the bitcoin system. Luckily, such "rare sats" that (may) have material value only occur in very few blocks (currently those every 4 years after subsidy adjustments), reducing the total impact it can have on miners.
While there are many risks on the horizon which may introduce MEVil in bitcoin, thus substantially risking the long-term censorship resistance (and therefore value) of bitcoin, there is no reason yet to fear that such an outcome is inevitable. Indeed, while MEV on bitcoin is inevitable and here today, “MEV” is a largely useless term for describing our censorship resistance and centralization concerns. Engineers developing, and users selecting, platforms which add additional expressivity to bitcoin must carefully consider the risk of MEVil these systems may introduce. Opting to build or use systems which introduce MEVil to bitcoin must thus be avoided, and considered antisocial, or the long term value in these systems and the bitcoin system itself may be destroyed.
projects / blog / commitdiff