From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 542E48E3 for ; Thu, 21 Dec 2017 21:30:22 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-io0-f195.google.com (mail-io0-f195.google.com [209.85.223.195]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6A69A4EB for ; Thu, 21 Dec 2017 21:30:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-io0-f195.google.com with SMTP id f7so2083018ioh.1 for ; Thu, 21 Dec 2017 13:30:21 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=1yHV+0ZYtZy1EFZPIZ8hNeW2cAQVUqB2/oqfSY5iC3s=; b=HJYyXsDi5qBKRPxpv+f/cLXXL9cMYrI0K5OvZWJV9ux8U3Vgp4GG0qDdQGyZV7rY/Z lWm+Tij3Xuw0heRosQeABX71YkXnRIrraWM3NTSwONEIoyOCYi2m00jxLUEWqAt+YMee cB2tq0toC2GO5ZZJKHgNi++Y/U+0Z4B+p+0AAEb62SXIf2X1M0TCFoFJGLvwGN2oYV2s AzdpE8+cquQUe/LU2XMvxm2UwhSufLcXwD8lm1QJTvQNAmmSGos3CByA0/CjhVslpgEz ZL5COcZx1iq7ZvlAsG+hlXbZL20tlPhmr4n09qUqtBKOuX3PxOP0845RGq/zoZC+A/Q/ P70A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=1yHV+0ZYtZy1EFZPIZ8hNeW2cAQVUqB2/oqfSY5iC3s=; b=BoAb+p+6j/NlccilPiDUXjOWgsnoE7GCLkIF3zt7KCBNoHXCut8f4bVPWtmfbqxsQ5 Km4x93iHANPtlyclmhOcj3nW72miWgtBs3P2MbQMzL2W/viJFRzXMNbh5p9Q/ZTMyoGa 74w/LPpBTLKgM/08WJnzqeTLZbt0TDD7WTWYOrTXWvXGw8dyFqi4FiPhxj0e4cPVaWnP fZnCDH3/zQP8AW64qmo/JNbeuvq1QWciRHnS4jVsIvpPS/x965ZJsAhjez6WUlIa5YaR KjEB7nJMtrRA0fN/mDcynZ8VV7S5D+XyQWyfc0asLWqgsRyxKEpeKNzWB+l4U8Sc0qR5 b0nQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AKGB3mL+QV6uXmAi7K69Quahjx2/IB/fvvnbVoptq8jLjtMR4mX/dsg2 Txd6bt6d9F2xHHpHi/ylc0ezeLWnL04hM96fvRkCeg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBouR7nWbBqT/KmbMiJwZk+nBf0ZnBKFvUS1UgSZKWu2D4mwrEv+ITjO4D5sxAGCvaIRtwnrH0KgY2LpBBxcgWOE= X-Received: by 10.107.10.41 with SMTP id u41mr12198761ioi.252.1513891820591; Thu, 21 Dec 2017 13:30:20 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.107.205.78 with HTTP; Thu, 21 Dec 2017 13:30:20 -0800 (PST) From: Melvin Carvalho Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2017 22:30:20 +0100 Message-ID: To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a113f97ca31f49b0560e06891" X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_05,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 21 Dec 2017 21:44:19 +0000 Subject: [bitcoin-dev] Total fees have almost crossed the block reward X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2017 21:30:22 -0000 --001a113f97ca31f49b0560e06891 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" I asked adam back at hcpp how the block chain would be secured in the long term, once the reward goes away. The base idea has always been that fees would replace the block reward. At that time fees were approximately 10% of the block reward, but have now reached 45%, with 50% potentially being crossed soon https://fork.lol/reward/feepct While this bodes well for the long term security of the coin, I think there is some legitimate concern that the fee per tx is prohibitive for some use cases, at this point in the adoption curve. Observations of segwit adoption show around 10% at this point http://segwit.party/charts/ Watching the mempool shows that the congestion is at a peak, though it's quite possible this will come down over the long weekend. I wonder if this is of concern to some. https://dedi.jochen-hoenicke.de/queue/more/#24h I thought these data points may be of interest and are mainly FYI. Though if further discussion is deemed appropriate, it would be interesting to hear thoughts. --001a113f97ca31f49b0560e06891 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I asked adam back at hcpp how the= block chain would be secured in the long term, once the reward goes away.= =C2=A0 The base idea has always been that fees would replace the block rewa= rd.

At that time fees were approximately 10% of the block rewa= rd, but have now reached 45%, with 50% potentially being crossed soon
https://fork.lol/reward/feepct=

While this bodes well for the long term security of the c= oin, I think there is some legitimate concern that the fee per tx is prohib= itive for some use cases, at this point in the adoption curve.

Observations of segwit adoption show around 10% at this point

http://segwit.party/charts/

<= /div>Watching the mempool shows that the congestion is at a peak, though it= 's quite possible this will come down over the long weekend.=C2=A0 I wo= nder if this is of concern to some.

https://dedi.jochen-hoenicke.de/queue/more/#24h=

I thought these data points may be of interest and are ma= inly FYI.=C2=A0 Though if further discussion is deemed appropriate, it woul= d be interesting to hear thoughts.
--001a113f97ca31f49b0560e06891--