Next scheduled rescrape ... never
Version 2
Last scraped
Edited on 28/05/2025, 09:14:37 UTC
This solution requires fractional satoshis. To make things simple, I propose dividing a satoshi into 100 million parts (because the demurrage cost is 1/100 million).
More complexity and more units is not desirable. Anyhow, if I understood you correctly your proposal will punish the best holders for simply holding? That is a terrible and radical change of incentives. 2. Lost coins and dust are eventually recovered.
Replace one type of confiscation with another? How do you know that my coins are lost, because I am not using them actively? 
There are simpler ways to approach this, and I will give one example. You can introduce a primary flat miner fee, and retain the variable fee from the fee market on top of it. Let's say that we introduce a a flat fee of 100 satoshi, which as of today would be $0.11. At 3000 transactions per block, that is an extra 300 000 sats.
More complexity may be necessary, even though it is not desirable. Are you saying that none of the protocol changes currently being considered increase complexity?
My suggestion does not confiscate coins. Like yours, it imposes an additional transaction fee, but based on the age of the coins. There is no need to determine whether coins are "lost".
The purpose of "tail emission" is to guarantee revenue per block. Your suggestion of a flat fee does not accomplish that.
Also, consider the steady state -- the amount burned during the current period is the same as the amount paid to you from the previous period. The two cancel each other.
Yes, but that's exactly the idea 
But that is a problem. If blocks are empty for 4 years, then there would be no tail emission for the next 4 years.
If you want to guarantee revenue from a block, but you don't want inflation, then you must pay it from the current supply. That requires some form of demurrage in the end as far as I can tell.
Version 1
Scraped on 28/05/2025, 08:49:50 UTC
This solution requires fractional satoshis. To make things simple, I propose dividing a satoshi into 100 million parts (because the demurrage cost is 1/100 million).
More complexity and more units is not desirable. Anyhow, if I understood you correctly your proposal will punish the best holders for simply holding? That is a terrible and radical change of incentives. 2. Lost coins and dust are eventually recovered.
Replace one type of confiscation with another? How do you know that my coins are lost, because I am not using them actively? There are simpler ways to approach this, and I will give one example. You can introduce a primary flat miner fee, and retain the variable fee from the fee market on top of it. Let's say that we introduce a a flat fee of 100 satoshi, which as of today would be $0.11. At 3000 transactions per block, that is an extra 300 000 sats.
More complexity may be necessary, even though it is not desirable. Are you saying that none of the protocol changes currently being considered increase complexity?
My suggestion does not confiscate coins. Like yours, it
The purpose of "tail emission" is to guarantee revenue per block. Your suggestion of a flat fee does not accomplish that.
Original archived Re: Tail emission ideas that retain the 21 million limit
Scraped on 28/05/2025, 08:44:42 UTC
This solution requires fractional satoshis. To make things simple, I propose dividing a satoshi into 100 million parts (because the demurrage cost is 1/100 million).
More complexity and more units is not desirable. Anyhow, if I understood you correctly your proposal will punish the best holders for simply holding? That is a terrible and radical change of incentives. 2. Lost coins and dust are eventually recovered.
Replace one type of confiscation with another? How do you know that my coins are lost, because I am not using them actively? There are simpler ways to approach this, and I will give one example. You can introduce a primary flat miner fee, and retain the variable fee from the fee market on top of it. Let's say that we introduce a a flat fee of 100 satoshi, which as of today would be $0.11. At 3000 transactions per block, that is an extra 300 000 sats.
More complexity may be necessary, even though it is not desirable. Are you saying that none of the protocol changes currently being considered increase complexity?
My suggestion does not confiscate coins. Like yours, it simply imposes an additional transaction fee, but based on the age of the coins. There is no need to determine whether coins are "lost".
The purpose of "tail emission" is to guarantee revenue per block. Your suggestion of a flat fee does not accomplish that.