1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
|
Return-Path: <tomh@thinlink.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2E75D720
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 31 Mar 2017 01:13:37 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-pg0-f44.google.com (mail-pg0-f44.google.com [74.125.83.44])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4EB60131
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 31 Mar 2017 01:13:36 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-pg0-f44.google.com with SMTP id 21so55036644pgg.1
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 30 Mar 2017 18:13:36 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=thinlink-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623;
h=subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date:user-agent
:mime-version:in-reply-to;
bh=uFvY2jRCN3l/L8AC6MAKKDQdZwiplbTfxy0ROhLRTIc=;
b=gxS+T9jxeLtaMk1V5XOIltpAhGpoRG1VmYQdZwlpf/NWwaYq/62zG0FgRZui34PeWt
J/3/EJxZKgcHdmglq+AorwOYpX5NSVGvC9OeKdNJ5m4tIXmDfJq/uvptTvL51CMazfX2
defL7p471y3jjHi87tDPAH3YU9T5w10WoyfqtzKkqpECE20pD6dCrigV10jo+e24VWuc
q/ck8I4Lz25siC/my9Kki6lJZEfF49I5ZY8ZA6DXcMRFardVEFKiY5XfacsRewRuroZo
ePBGkHh1xGNwSlBInB39BZ/SU4CzEIQ7aqg8/wepGF9Xucbc/8o0NxNS0RIHGJ5ALILJ
7lVQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date
:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to;
bh=uFvY2jRCN3l/L8AC6MAKKDQdZwiplbTfxy0ROhLRTIc=;
b=Km1Nfz1XzWJZwEvDkESDdyFuzveLYlMIR/P0SRoVLR8+poaKUprjGJRu2RXsXdLIk4
cKjO6bDQTFKtb+8uDRWeWfU82BG4KtoiypsAJxCTgI7/l1Xneo2IR5Uz7DtjlqDNXQD8
+EAY8naYuFqQFaFAXJCYgfqdOB5abfMqd/UYIfIjaSaAucs8ltVTTwZzGfSiB9UuAxiP
vvT4wetT9z5CzAHxZ51rM6BkkGIgucgh9iEQL6sTG6XdgSXB9nsiBJVZSlki2lk11bAk
lYHNG2LsMSONwrp92aEiAd3QwoQ4LgIb8kNUpEBPu6FZwzjze3yRMdRZ8VPnNB2D9a1R
+MNg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H3MQfSARvVSIDv90JODAkKUxr969ojc5QeHJvZGY1u9Wtj27Xh5PG3L4q+maCLmSQ4Q
X-Received: by 10.98.160.212 with SMTP id p81mr261820pfl.204.1490922815778;
Thu, 30 Mar 2017 18:13:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.89] (99-8-65-117.lightspeed.davlca.sbcglobal.net.
[99.8.65.117]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id
u198sm6611151pgb.45.2017.03.30.18.13.34
(version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
Thu, 30 Mar 2017 18:13:34 -0700 (PDT)
To: David Vorick <david.vorick@gmail.com>,
Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
References: <CALJP9GB2Fds8m9JpaVv0NxGDr579BtR9RMs7-KNSLkK8Mz7LoA@mail.gmail.com>
<CALJP9GAOgpSAhrrYFPRbGKZXwqZn_oDUmv6B7wcvwxcZufDd0g@mail.gmail.com>
<CALJP9GDkdxsvOZHJxzx+0pvjWBAkAswZCWXcp=zL7LNMRNfCOg@mail.gmail.com>
<CALJP9GBk4gG0H+tEJmEiz=0+LAQoe6_sL1Fv-BCJSfmvfY8PRA@mail.gmail.com>
<CALJP9GDH1xQ-cYc1SN6jejXDA49eiy_OR49XLLWd+=VdNo7ekA@mail.gmail.com>
<CAFVRnyq07qNappzwEmB_e+xCKPyCzHcWbnTDWCdeWjrsMMioLQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Tom Harding <tomh@thinlink.com>
Message-ID: <84eb5e29-b97d-38e5-763f-eb784e83d209@thinlink.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 18:13:35 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/45.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAFVRnyq07qNappzwEmB_e+xCKPyCzHcWbnTDWCdeWjrsMMioLQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="------------1F429463904CFD16B0DD34E8"
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID, HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 01:29:56 +0000
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] High fees / centralization
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 01:13:37 -0000
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------1F429463904CFD16B0DD34E8
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
On 3/30/2017 9:14 AM, David Vorick wrote:
> On Mar 30, 2017 12:04 PM, "Tom Harding via bitcoin-dev"
> <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>> wrote:
>
> Raystonn,
>
> Your logic is very hard to dispute. An important special case is
> small miners.
>
> Small miners use pools exactly because they want smaller, more
> frequent payments.
>
> Rising fees force them to take payments less frequently, and will
> only tend to make more of them give up.
>
> With fees rising superlinearly, this centralizing effect is much
> stronger than the oft-cited worry of small miners joining large
> pools to decrease orphan rates.
>
>
> Miners get paid on average once every ten minutes. The size of fees
> and the number of fee transactions does not change the payout rate.
>
> Further, we are very far from the point (in my appraisal) where fees
> are high enough to block home users from using the network.
>
> Bitcoin has many high-value use cases such as savings. We should not
> throw away the core innovation of monetary sovereignty in pursuit of
> supporting 0.1% of the world's daily transactions.
>
Owners of small mining rigs get paid by pools, generally using regular
transactions that pay regular fees (p2pool is an exception that pays
directly from coinbase). The point is the unintended consequences are
directly at odds with one of the justifications offered for small blocks
- miner centralization.
This is a special case. Raystonn's general point was that high fees
will lead to fewer economic actors overall, and therefore fewer full nodes.
--------------1F429463904CFD16B0DD34E8
Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
On 3/30/2017 9:14 AM, David Vorick wrote:<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAFVRnyq07qNappzwEmB_e+xCKPyCzHcWbnTDWCdeWjrsMMioLQ@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="auto">
<div>On Mar 30, 2017 12:04 PM, "Tom Harding via bitcoin-dev"
<<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>>
wrote:
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote class="quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="auto">
<div style="font-family:sans-serif" dir="auto">Raystonn, </div>
<div style="font-family:sans-serif" dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div style="font-family:sans-serif" dir="auto">Your
logic is very hard to dispute. An important special
case is small miners.</div>
<div style="font-family:sans-serif" dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div style="font-family:sans-serif" dir="auto">Small
miners use pools exactly because they want smaller,
more frequent payments.</div>
<div dir="auto" style="font-family:sans-serif"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto" style="font-family:sans-serif">Rising
fees force them to take payments less frequently,
and will only tend to make more of them give up.</div>
<div dir="auto" style="font-family:sans-serif"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto" style="font-family:sans-serif">With
fees rising superlinearly, this centralizing effect
is much stronger than the oft-cited worry of small
miners joining large pools to decrease orphan rates.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Miners get paid on average once every ten
minutes. The size of fees and the number of fee transactions
does not change the payout rate.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Further, we are very far from the point (in my
appraisal) where fees are high enough to block home users from
using the network.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Bitcoin has many high-value use cases such as
savings. We should not throw away the core innovation of
monetary sovereignty in pursuit of supporting 0.1% of the
world's daily transactions.</div>
<div dir="auto">
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Owners of small mining rigs get paid by pools, generally using
regular transactions that pay regular fees (p2pool is an exception
that pays directly from coinbase). The point is the unintended
consequences are directly at odds with one of the justifications
offered for small blocks - miner centralization.<br>
<br>
This is a special case. Raystonn's general point was that high fees
will lead to fewer economic actors overall, and therefore fewer full
nodes.<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>
--------------1F429463904CFD16B0DD34E8--
|
