From: Mark Friedenbach <mark@monetize.io>
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] On OP_RETURN in upcoming 0.9 release
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 11:25:27 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5310E2A7.3060809@monetize.io> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAEz79Po37XkoQ=+kQOTdagVn-vYuqYwotQf58YcgTndaaAmXNw@mail.gmail.com>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Transaction fees are a DoS mitigating cost to the person making the
transaction, but they are generally not paid to the people who
actually incur costs in validating the blockchain. Actual transaction
processing costs are an externality that is completely unpaid for.
When I add a 1Kb transaction to the blockchain, there is an attached
fee which probabilistically goes to one of the miners. But every other
full node on the network also receives this transaction, processes it,
and adds it to local storage. From now until the heat death of the
universe that 1Kb of data will be redundantly stored and transmitted
to every single person who validates the block chain. None of these
countless people are reimbursed for their storage, bandwidth, and
processing costs. Not even a single satoshi.
Yes, transaction fees are broken. But it is their very nature which is
broken (sending coins to the miners, not the greater validator set),
and no little tweak like the one Warren links to will fix this.
But, in the absence of a reformed fee regime - which it is not clear
is even possible - one could at least make the hand-wavey argument
that people who validate the block chain receive benefit from it as a
payment network. Therefore processing of the block chain is "paid for"
by the utility it provides once fully synced.
However even this weak argument does not extend to general data
storage. If you want to put all of wikileaks or whatever in the block
chain, then you are extracting a rent from every full node which is
forced to process and store this data for eternity without
compensation or derived utility. You are extorting users of the
payment network into providing a storage service at no cost, because
the alternative (losing bitcoin as a payment network) would cost them
more.
That is not ethical behavior. That is not behavior which responsible
developers should allow in the reference client.
Mark
On 02/28/2014 06:42 AM, Warren Togami Jr. wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 7:25 PM, Troy Benjegerdes <hozer@hozed.org
> <mailto:hozer@hozed.org>> wrote:
>
>
> Either the transaction fees are sufficient to pay the cost for
> whatever random junk anyone wants to put there, or they are not,
> and if they are not, then I suggest you re-think the fee structure
> rather than trying to pre-regulate me putting 80 character pithy
> quotes in the blockhain.
>
>
> https://github.com/litecoin-project/litecoin/commit/db4d8e21d99551bef4c807aa1534a074e4b7964d
>
> In one way in particular, the transaction fees per kilobyte
> completely failed to account for the actual cost to the network.
> If Bitcoin had adopted a common-sense rule like this, I would have
> had no reason to join Litecoin development last year. This is one
> of the few economic design flaws that Satoshi overlooked in the
> original design.
>
> As much as I personally hate the idea of data storage in the
> blockchain, this at least discourages the creation of permanent
> UTXO.
>
> Warren Togami
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
Flow-based real-time traffic analytics software. Cisco certified tool.
> Monitor traffic, SLAs, QoS, Medianet, WAAS etc. with NetFlow
> Analyzer Customize your own dashboards, set traffic alerts and
> generate reports. Network behavioral analysis & security
> monitoring. All-in-one tool.
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=126839071&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________ Bitcoin-development
> mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.14 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/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=KbW/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-02-28 19:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-02-24 16:03 [Bitcoin-development] On OP_RETURN in upcoming 0.9 release Jeff Garzik
2014-02-24 16:16 ` Pieter Wuille
2014-02-24 16:32 ` Jeff Garzik
2014-02-24 16:33 ` Jeff Garzik
2014-02-24 16:39 ` Wladimir
2014-02-24 16:45 ` Gavin Andresen
2014-02-24 16:50 ` Pavol Rusnak
2014-02-24 17:23 ` Mark Friedenbach
2014-02-24 23:06 ` Andreas Petersson
2014-02-24 23:13 ` Gregory Maxwell
2014-02-24 23:13 ` Luke-Jr
2014-02-28 5:25 ` Troy Benjegerdes
2014-02-28 14:42 ` Warren Togami Jr.
2014-02-28 19:25 ` Mark Friedenbach [this message]
2014-02-28 19:36 ` Justus Ranvier
2014-02-28 20:10 ` Drak
2014-02-24 17:10 ` Jeff Garzik
2014-02-24 22:12 ` Jeremy Spilman
2014-02-24 22:50 ` Jeff Garzik
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=5310E2A7.3060809@monetize.io \
--to=mark@monetize.io \
--cc=bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox