franky you forget that these numbers happened with mining fees as they are
with BU mining fees could be close to zero and there is no limitation, just assumptions of the BU team that there will be "market balance"
In theory blocks could become gigantic, no matter what they say
HEY, if they are so sure about "market balance" then why not put a hard limit in, maby 8MB? Then watch and see what happens?
with BU mining fees could be close to zero and there is no limitation, just assumptions of the BU team that there will be "market balance"
In theory blocks could become gigantic, no matter what they say
HEY, if they are so sure about "market balance" then why not put a hard limit in, maby 8MB? Then watch and see what happens?
mining tx fee's are not an issue today. and not gonna be an issue for decades.
pools do not care about the fee's today. and not gonna be an issue for decades.
its core that have done the code changes to let the fees become absurd. not pools.
lastly.
yea jumping to say 8mb blocks over night may only get filled with maybe 3-4mb of tx data today where this could crash the tx fee's down to near zero cost to transact. good for users and not a problem for pools
but obviously pools wont go full wetard up to 8mb over night or 32mb overnight either. they would just like a bit of space to get rid of any mempool backlog.
hence the whole policy.h preferences that allow blocks to be more dynamic.
what results is that and equilibrium is found where by if a pool got to 1.5mb -2mb and started to see that the demand for capacity brings the fee prices right down, and a healthy level will be found.. symbiotically.
even a new priority fee mechanism could be brought in which rewards lean users that dont spend every block and penalises users that make bloated tx every block
here is one example - not perfect. but think about it
imagine that we decided its acceptable that people should have a way to get priority if they have a lean tx and signal that they only want to spend funds once a day. (reasonable expectation)
where if they want to spend more often costs rise, if they want bloated tx, costs rise..
which then allows those that just pay their rent once a month or buys groceries every couple days to be ok using onchain bitcoin.. and where the costs of trying to spam the network (every block) becomes expensive where by they would be better off using LN. (for things like faucet raiding/day trading every 1-10 minutes)
so lets think about a priority fee thats not about rich vs poor(like the old one was) but about reducing respend spam and bloat.
lets imagine we actually use the tx age combined with CLTV to signal the network that a user is willing to add some maturity time if their tx age is under a day, to signal they want it confirmed but allowing themselves to be locked out of spending for an average of 24 hours.(thats what CLTV does)
and where the bloat of the tx vs the blocksize has some impact too... rather than the old formulae with was more about the value of the tx
as you can see its not about tx value. its about bloat and age.
this way
those not wanting to spend more than once a day and dont bloat the blocks get preferential treatment onchain ($0.01).
if you are willing to wait a day but your taking up 1% of the blockspace. you pay more ($0.44)
if you want to be a spammer spending every block. you pay the price($1.44)
and if you want to be a total ass-hat and be both bloated and respending EVERY BLOCK you pay the ultimate price($63.72)
note this is not perfect. but think about it
imagine that we decided its acceptable that people should have a way to get priority if they have a lean tx and signal that they only want to spend funds once a day. (reasonable expectation)
where if they want to spend more often costs rise, if they want bloated tx, costs rise..
which then allows those that just pay their rent once a month or buys groceries every couple days to be ok using onchain bitcoin.. and where the costs of trying to spam the network (every block) becomes expensive where by they would be better off using LN. (for things like faucet raiding/day trading every 1-10 minutes)
so lets think about a priority fee thats not about rich vs poor(like the old one was) but about reducing respend spam and bloat.
lets imagine we actually use the tx age combined with CLTV to signal the network that a user is willing to add some maturity time if their tx age is under a day, to signal they want it confirmed but allowing themselves to be locked out of spending for an average of 24 hours.(thats what CLTV does)
and where the bloat of the tx vs the blocksize has some impact too... rather than the old formulae with was more about the value of the tx
as you can see its not about tx value. its about bloat and age.
this way
those not wanting to spend more than once a day and dont bloat the blocks get preferential treatment onchain ($0.01).
if you are willing to wait a day but your taking up 1% of the blockspace. you pay more ($0.44)
if you want to be a spammer spending every block. you pay the price($1.44)
and if you want to be a total ass-hat and be both bloated and respending EVERY BLOCK you pay the ultimate price($63.72)
note this is not perfect. but think about it