Re: [bitcoin-dev] Block size adjustment idea - expedience fees + difficulty scaling proportional to block size (+ fee pool)

[Natanael <natanael.l@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1706 bytes --]

Sorry for sending a double, hit the wrong button...

Den 31 mars 2017 06:14 skrev "Natanael" <natanael.l@gmail.com>:

>
>
> Den 30 mars 2017 11:34 skrev "Natanael" <natanael.l@gmail.com>:
>
> Block size dependent difficulty scaling. Hardfork required.
>
> Larger blocks means greater difficulty - but it doesn't scale linearly,
> rather a little less than linearly. That means miners can take a penalty in
> difficulty to claim a greater number of high fee transactions in the same
> amount of time (effectively increasing "block size bitrate"), increasing
> their profits. When such profitable fees aren't available, they have to
> reduce block size.
>
> In other words, the users literally pay miners to increase block size (or
> don't pay, which reduces it).
>
>
> This can be simplified if we do get a fee pool (less hardfork code, more
> softfork code), except that the effect will be partially reduced by the
> mining subsidy until it approximately reaches parity with average total
> fees.
>
> We don't need to alter difficulty calculation.
> Instead we alter the percentage of the fees that the miner gets to claim
> VS what he have to donate to the pool based on the size of the block he
> generated.
> Larger block = smaller percentage of fees. This is another way to pay for
> blocksize. The effect of this is that on average, miners that generate
> smaller blocks takes a share of what otherwise would be part of the mining
> profits of those generating larger blocks.
>
> We would need to keep pieces of the section from above on expected
> blocksize calculation. Because the closer you are to the expected
> blocksize, the more you keep. And thus we need to adjust it according to
> usage.
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2851 bytes --]