Re: [bitcoin-dev] Consensus based block size retargeting algorithm (draft)

[Gavin <gavinandresen@gmail.com>]

With this proposal, how much would it cost a miner to include an 'extra' 500-byte transaction if the average block size is 900K and it costs the miner 20BTC in electricity/capital/etc to mine a block?

If my understanding of the proposal is correct, it is:

500/900000 * 20 = 0.11111 BTC

... Or $2.50 at today's exchange rate.

That seems excessive.

--
Gavin Andresen


> On Aug 28, 2015, at 5:15 PM, Matt Whitlock via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> 
> This is the best proposal I've seen yet. Allow me to summarize:
> 
> • It addresses the problem, in Jeff Garzik's BIP 100, of miners selling their block-size votes.
> • It addresses the problem, in Gavin Andresen's BIP 101, of blindly trying to predict future market needs versus future technological capacities.
> • It avoids a large step discontinuity in the block-size limit by starting with a 1-MB limit.
> • It throttles changes to ±10% every 2016 blocks.
> • It imposes a tangible cost (higher difficulty) on miners who vote to raise the block-size limit.
> • It avoids incentivizing miners to vote to lower the block-size limit.
> 
> However, this proposal currently fails to answer a very important question:
> 
> • What is the mechanism for activation of the new consensus rule? It is when a certain percentage of the blocks mined in a 2016-block retargeting period contain valid block-size votes?
> 
> 
> https://github.com/btcdrak/bips/blob/bip-cbbsra/bip-cbbrsa.mediawiki
> 
> 
>> On Friday, 28 August 2015, at 9:28 pm, Btc Drak via bitcoin-dev wrote:
>> Pull request: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/187
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev