From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org (smtp3.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::136]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 956C2C002D for ; Thu, 7 Jul 2022 14:05:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A0806120E for ; Thu, 7 Jul 2022 14:05:44 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp3.osuosl.org 7A0806120E Authentication-Results: smtp3.osuosl.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=q32-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com header.i=@q32-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20210112 header.b=4n7gS2Ds X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.301 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.301 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp3.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QIqvEFHsQx-9 for ; Thu, 7 Jul 2022 14:05:41 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp3.osuosl.org 955A660F5F Received: from mail-lf1-x129.google.com (mail-lf1-x129.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::129]) by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 955A660F5F for ; Thu, 7 Jul 2022 14:05:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-lf1-x129.google.com with SMTP id i18so31288653lfu.8 for ; Thu, 07 Jul 2022 07:05:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=q32-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=4tDwXej3XYNdmhOE8K0SBsNP0fWetVtkYhVFcFgYtUA=; b=4n7gS2DsSfR633KxXB0BolzyhGJST1sRix6SK0TI85/KtanTaKm726ss5z1r2KLB2U FGVT49PzzIC1aTpgOVKMmM4GihGu3P0OC57e/6jDDiOLKd86T/qJg5DMBZbH7Zrwk8dg CNo8LHoOR/VoHq+7XxjGkTBMKejcZMy8JNGUEOUzyBmob/jerayIMrGmwU0ub+xA/7BZ GupkofP0FeDeV88yDyPsUqf2V98Yz41dUOdZ1bo/Mx1mo6a+OrFbiD7kb+ke9JePb0Yt WuTfQ/bEULARLTmfUCePuXiIt5auns6wb0JbD1+pfNMjRMraYxJdWec/5b6dT7dKluGI nsTQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=4tDwXej3XYNdmhOE8K0SBsNP0fWetVtkYhVFcFgYtUA=; b=BwsBfQl6ASbaO2nvmVQYKB7TDx3fJD9NQFg7pxeyrx8ZVwbGnQS8a7ZOuRjTtN3twt 5iTwC8PGHqzglnvggkAkUTahB5WaEBrk7kGONiZQvq969r5Fdi4YkvDKoHZ1s27Ubb1W d+H70QuOrAkxnJRQ8SgvjmTUPG9XPAsEcAsnIYgdwebRa1PCyNoseEqDSOwaP05SRaZI hnAUH6gHx9Kb3VbzvbuC3bTLuV+YZALoTJ8Yhjxyk7fcAGmYn/KetyDjgJ9vWqMbHaOg 3Y5v7cw8c89kFmFYCOU2V5Z9LnLvPUbModSMIaNtk/H6JUUo19PZzQwr1EeYaaHxikJU DRXA== X-Gm-Message-State: AJIora+YpkHJRV7WGlw0AuNnJXsTfQGeMb7MmTqfeRU7xbuafbPOcA87 H5gEU9MWAYbbhwC9e0nzMkpurPfV/v6WzzBEX/4COro= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGRyM1vwWbn8lxfiHAVy0VIydIyIdqDWMsNl60wOeQdrjZ1PzMrQgQmvbdkP9B2ILnMJFEzXvj2bpchJG9IsB87qaFo= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:4003:b0:47f:97e9:28b8 with SMTP id br3-20020a056512400300b0047f97e928b8mr29734524lfb.141.1657202738315; Thu, 07 Jul 2022 07:05:38 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <139633828-26b5fcbad80d1ca7046479237716ace3@pmq8v.m5r2.onet> In-Reply-To: From: Erik Aronesty Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2022 10:05:25 -0400 Message-ID: To: Billy Tetrud , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000089ca7105e3379487" X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 07 Jul 2022 14:43:20 +0000 Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin covenants are inevitable 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: Thu, 07 Jul 2022 14:05:44 -0000 --00000000000089ca7105e3379487 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" . > > My thoughts on this are that we will need to periodically make some > software change to adjust a *target amount of investment in security*, > because the > I think perhaps you're underestimating the degree to which utility can be added to the main chain to encourage fees. For example, lightning channel open and close transactions are more valuable, via aggregation, than simple money transfers. The value of higher utility transactions goes up fairly quickly. There is no end of the possibility of fee levels in response to increased utility Other networks have clearly proven the extremes of this, with rampant fees appearing rapidly in response to higher utility levels Because this has already been proven on other networks, we can plan to gradually increase the utility of on-chain transactions in response to reward reductions This should be more than sufficient to offset and maintain sufficient security ... Hence the title of this thread. --00000000000089ca7105e3379487 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

.

My thoughts on this are that we will nee= d to periodically make some software change to adjust a *target amount of i= nvestment in security*, because the

I = think perhaps you're=C2=A0 underestimating the degree to which utility = can be added to the main chain to encourage fees.
For example, lightning channel open and close tra= nsactions are more valuable, via aggregation, than simple money transfers.<= /div>

The value of higher util= ity transactions goes up fairly quickly.

<= div dir=3D"auto">There is no end of the possibility of fee levels in respon= se to increased utility

= Other networks have clearly proven the extremes of this, with rampant fees = appearing rapidly in response to higher utility levels

Because this has already been proven on othe= r networks, we can plan to gradually=C2=A0 increase the utility of on-chain= transactions in response to reward reductions

<= /div>
This should be more than sufficient to offset and ma= intain sufficient security=C2=A0

... Hence the title of this thread.
--00000000000089ca7105e3379487--