Quote from: SgtSpike on July 11, 2013, 10:20:18 PM

Quote from: Bitcoin Megastore on July 11, 2013, 04:22:32 PM

Quote from: SRoulette on July 11, 2013, 02:02:01 PM

Quote from: BadBitcoin (James Sutton) on July 10, 2013, 01:54:59 PM

we were going to run into this problem sooner or later, script allows for data to be stored in the blockchain, however since there is currently no incentive to hold the blockchain (fees being paid to hold it), eventually we'll run into serious storage problems enhanced by using the blockchain for storage, my companies design is looking at that seriously and we're currently trying to figure out a method that will keep bloat down to a minimum while maintaining a DDOS proof account ledger.

short answer is no 0 btc fees, which I would happily support.

+1

Zero fee trasactions should be banned. Under all scenarios possible, sending 300 BTC should cost more in transaction fees than sending less BTC.
In real world, we already have fucked-up monetary system that favours rich over poor, do we want the same or similar system online as well? No.

The purpose of fees is to limit spam, not to create an advantage/disadvantage of the rich vs poor. If you want to "even it out", then simply require a fee that grow linearly with how much room the transaction takes. Say, 1 satoshi for every byte of room on the blockchain, or something.

See this except it's outdated and the fee/kb is 0.0001: http://bitcoinfees.com/