Quote from: iamnotback on November 25, 2016, 11:57:20 PM

Quote from: ArticMine on November 25, 2016, 11:48:43 PM

Quote from: iamnotback on November 25, 2016, 11:32:56 PM

...

Which my paper states very clearly, that is only true because you assume that transaction volume won't be significant enough such that transaction fees do not approach the minted block reward. You assume Monero will never handle any where near the world's volume of transactions and/or that the market cap will rise sufficiently such that the tiny perpetual minted block reward is greater than the transaction-related costs (but given the horrendous O(n²) scaling problem of Satoshi's design, then this assumption also isn't likely true at VISA scale).

But that doesn't help because as my paper states very clearly, proof-of-work remains a winner-take-all any way. Thus Monero's perpetual minted block reward does nothing to solve the problem.

The inevitable mining cartel (presuming Monero becomes economically relevant) will dictate transaction fees in Monero as well, and also control the mining and all the bad impacts (censorship, deanonymization, etc) that come with it.

Sorry. Better luck next time.

I make no such assumptions. What you are assuming, incorrectly I must add, is a fixed per KB transaction fee in Monero regardless of blocksize or market cap. This assumption is fundamentally incorrect as I have explained before because of the adaptive blocksize limit and penalty function ensure that over time the total fees paid per block remain in a constant range when compared to the block reward. Increase the blocksize in Monero by a factor of 100x and the fees per KB drop by a factor of 100x.

ArticMine here you are again posting your inkblots. Slow down and try to understand your mistakes. Go take some quiet time and think for a while before you respond, so you don't fill up thread with useless noise.

I am saying that is as the "transaction-related costs" approach the minted block reward, then the Tragedy of the Commons in transaction fees results. This has nothing to do with a fixed per KB transaction fee, but rather the costs of actually processing the transactions. You have to factor in that costs include the fact in proof-of-work mining, that a 0.1% hashrate miner must propagate and validate 100% of the systemic transaction volume (yet he is only paid 0.1% portion of the total systemic rewards, and probably even paid less because of selfish mining and asymmetric propagation costs due to mining on the wrong chain part of time).

And any way, the entire discussion is irrelevant, because regardless, the economies-of-scale in proof-of-work dictate that it is a winner-take-all power vacuum. So you are just wasting your time any way arguing about the transaction fee aspect.

The inevitable mining cartel (presuming Monero becomes economically relevant) will dictate transaction fees in Monero as well, and also control the mining and all the bad impacts (censorship, deanonymization, etc) that come with it.

Sorry. Better luck next time.

No. Dude, this goes back to what I was saying about decentralized power structures, they feed multiple pools of resources, so the more payment gateways you add the more decentralization you have--if you run around chasing oil fields, of course you are going to get train costs plus land cost plus whatever, but if your aim is towards the stars, you must create multiple points of entry, re-entry, pull, push, whatever....my point is that if you land the thing to friendly miners in a control spasm of leaked resources, of course you get a parasite that can barely get airborne--the lust for power works as a virtual control mechanism through the will for control and anarchy--these are fail safes built into the natural order of Earth--they don't necessarily apply to space, which in our limited terms is infinite--so infinity negates limited resource arguments as I can at least fathom self-replicating drone farms that intertwine and create new outposts as they scour the universe for not-so-rare minerals that remain in abundance. The Egyptians kept pointing us out of the fertile crescent and towards the sun god--that's why he remains a part of myth and religion. What's weird is that I sucked at puzzle's growing up, but I was always good at drawing them.

TLDR : a way to counteract electrical mining cartels is to increase distribution field and to create software designed to disrupt centralizing.

phones # + software # + entry/exit points # = scale of decentralization

Focusing on power constraints misses the point.