From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org (smtp2.osuosl.org [140.211.166.133]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F1B6C002D for ; Mon, 11 Jul 2022 23:29:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46176403B7 for ; Mon, 11 Jul 2022 23:29:58 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp2.osuosl.org 46176403B7 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 2.498 X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.498 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, LOTS_OF_MONEY=0.001, MONEY_NOHTML=2.499, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp2.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fxDOh-r1WccC for ; Mon, 11 Jul 2022 23:29:56 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp2.osuosl.org 2E94D4011D Received: from azure.erisian.com.au (azure.erisian.com.au [172.104.61.193]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2E94D4011D for ; Mon, 11 Jul 2022 23:29:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from aj@azure.erisian.com.au (helo=sapphire.erisian.com.au) by azure.erisian.com.au with esmtpsa (Exim 4.92 #3 (Debian)) id 1oB2qe-0000Nk-2W; Tue, 12 Jul 2022 09:29:54 +1000 Received: by sapphire.erisian.com.au (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 12 Jul 2022 09:29:47 +1000 Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2022 09:29:47 +1000 From: Anthony Towns To: Bram Cohen , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Message-ID: <20220711232947.GC20899@erisian.com.au> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-Spam-Score-int: -18 X-Spam-Bar: - Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Security problems with relying on transaction fees for security X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2022 23:29:58 -0000 On Mon, Jul 11, 2022 at 11:12:52AM -0700, Bram Cohen via bitcoin-dev wrote: > If transaction fees came in at an even rate over time all at the exact same > level then they work fine for security, acting similarly to fixed block > rewards. Unfortunately that isn't how it works in the real world. That just becomes a market design question. There's been some trivial effort put into that for bitcoin (ie, getting people to actually chooses fees based on the weight of their transaction, and having weight be the sole limiting factor for miners), but not a lot, and there's evidence both from previous times in Bitcoin's history and from altcoin's that the market can support higher fees. Should we work on that today, though? It doesn't seem smart to me: the subsidy is already quite substantial ($6.5 billion USD per year at current prices) so raising fees to 10% of block reward would transfer another $650M USD from bitcoin users to miners (or ASIC manfucturers and electricity producers) each year, achieving what? Refuting some FUD? Cheers, aj