Quote from: mixoftix on Today at 08:41:53 AM

putting such inflation on btc is against its whitepaper, but adding new fee structure could pass by a BIP, I think.

I don't think we should limit ourselves to strictly following the whitepaper. Satoshi is a smart guy but he couldn't foresee every outcome.

I don't total disagree with this idea. I think there should be a longer grace period before slashing someones wallet though. I have thought before that if a wallet hasn't moved in 30-50 years then it should be assumed it is lost funds and should be redistributed to the miners some how.

A concern I have is that bitcoin is effectively deflationary. due to lost funds, dust wallets, and population growth. So some how redistributing the lost funds and dust wallets would be a good idea. If we know for certain they are unusable funds.

I think there is something already in bitcoin code called provably unspendable pubkey script. Which auto gives the BTC to the miners if the pubkey script is provable unspendable. If somehow the private key to a UTXO is provable lost from not being used for over 50 years then it could be redistributed to miners.

Quote from: stompix on Today at 02:39:23 PM

Pretty simple solution, make is so that more people can use the chain and by doing so the fees will compensate the block reward.
Instead of 400 000 tx paying the equivalent of 40 000 000 so 100$ per tx, have 40 000 000 tx paying 1$.
And you will not tax someone who doesn't use it.

Bitcoin cash did this and their miners are only getting $1500 per a block.

If block size increases the fees will drop. Not sure if these effect would be linear or not but in theory if double the transactions are placed in blocks then fee rate should half. resulting in the same amount of fees for the miners.