02:45 <luke-jr> maaku: well, I'd say improving security is definitely possible simply because of how terrible security presently is :p

12:17 <userdotname> I was thinking about how miners can effectively get 'free' transactions if they refuse to propagate their transactions to the rest of the network, thereby guaranteeing they get to collect their own fees. That means they could disproportionately affect the network's users by spamming the network. What could be done to mitigate this (other than being conservative with the block size limit)? Could more ambiguous rules be added (like rejecting blocks

12:17 <userdotname> which contain a large proportion of unseen transactions)? Something like this would only work with online nodes. The obvious flipside is that rules like this could undermine the network's censorship resistance. I'd love to hear what people think.