This makes little to no sense. "Median" the most commonly used tx fee, aka 4 cents.
Show me where in the white paper it says bitcoin was supposed to be used by absolutely everybody on planet earth.
you tear down bitcoin at every turn and offer no viable alternatives. feel free to fork a "Frank Coin" and lets see how far you get with it. Please -- instead of commenting on this forum, that's really where your time would best be served.
Show me where in the white paper it says bitcoin was supposed to be used by absolutely everybody on planet earth.
you tear down bitcoin at every turn and offer no viable alternatives. feel free to fork a "Frank Coin" and lets see how far you get with it. Please -- instead of commenting on this forum, that's really where your time would best be served.
A. median is not the most commonly used number!!
1,1,1,1,1,5,11,11,11,11,11 median =5 but is used only once
plus on a 5seat bus wont get you a seat...
by using average 5.9 would be a case that i get ahead of you in the queue
median is not a middle "value" of a bunch of numbers.. median doesnt even count the values
its just the middle position.
you cant use position metric to work out a best value..
B. no one said everyone.. but it shouldnt exclude a certain class of people.
i guess your greed of wanting bitcoin only for the privileged out weighs the old ethos of open borderless unbanked..
anyway
show me how LN fits the concept of bitcoin
" A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash would allow online
payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a
financial institution. Digital signatures provide part of the solution, but the main
benefits are lost if a trusted third party is still required to prevent double-spending"
1. directly from one party to another = no routing, no hubs, no custodians, no factories
2. without going through a financial institution = no hubs/custodians/factories
3. benefit lost if a trusted third party is still required = no factories/custodians/hubs
and dont get me started on the "control of ownership".. you wont win
C. an example of a fee formula thats not just network broad "everyone pays more so everyone should use LN" u ask.. well:
there are many ways. to ofset the spammers from the ones that wont benefit
here is one which doesnt cause every user on the bitcoin network needing an increasing average fee.
(EG current situation. if one person spams txs into a block everyone has to pay a higher fee to bribe a pool)
while also (unbiasedly) persuading the spam every block regular spenders who 'could' benefit from LN to then use it
as using the bitcoin network is costing just the spammers more
here is one which doesnt cause every user on the bitcoin network needing an increasing average fee.
(EG current situation. if one person spams txs into a block everyone has to pay a higher fee to bribe a pool)
while also (unbiasedly) persuading the spam every block regular spenders who 'could' benefit from LN to then use it
as using the bitcoin network is costing just the spammers more
so lets think about a priority fee thats not about rich vs poor(like the old one). not about a network wide everyone should pay an estimated average increased fee(like currently) but about respend spam and bloaters pay more, and everyone else pays for what they use dependant on personal circumstance.
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 because they are happy to wait to get cheaper fees.. or rduce the lock if they want priority by paying more for less delay.
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.
if you are willing to wait a day but your taking up 1% of the blockspace. you pay more
if you want to be a spammer spending every block. you pay the price
and if you want to be a total ass-hat and be both bloated and respending often you pay the ultimate price
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 because they are happy to wait to get cheaper fees.. or rduce the lock if they want priority by paying more for less delay.
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.
if you are willing to wait a day but your taking up 1% of the blockspace. you pay more
if you want to be a spammer spending every block. you pay the price
and if you want to be a total ass-hat and be both bloated and respending often you pay the ultimate price