Thanks for the response!

Yes, it’s not clearly worded, but I think he’s saying that for small CTV transactions, it might be more expensive to use CPFP than to make a private OOB payment to a miner. And he calls this a potential problem. 

I think he’s glossing over a lot, but before we get to that, let’s do a quick sync on terminology so we can make sure we’re on the same page. 

Payments to miners can be public or private. A public payment is broadcast to the entire miner network and the winning miner receives it. These public payments are perfectly fine and have no risk. The key is that every miner has access and competes on hashrate as per the incentives of the mining network.

Your example of a forced lightning closure is a good example of a public payment. CPFP is another. I have no issues with publicly broadcasted presigned transactions. I agree that these aren’t risky. (And package relay is awesome too.)

Private OOB payments are the risky ones. These are payments made via private APIs to a large miner to submit or to reprioritize a transaction.  

Eg, MARA’s Slipstream API:
https://x.com/JStefanop1/status/1760764664651133162

These private OOB payments create centralizing incentives. The larger miners make disproportionately more revenue than smaller miners. The greater the private revenue opportunities, the fewer the number of miners we can expect to have. 

Do you agree with the distinction between public and private payments to miners?

We can chat about that more, or we can chat about why CTV has the potential to create those risky private OOB payments.