From: Oliver Petruzel <opetruzel@gmail.com>
To: Adam Ritter <aritter@gmail.com>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Your Gmaxwell exchange
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2015 22:30:44 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CALhpmH2yH1csM8=sodLN5bdSm-hhoWsNVxHPHHsGRYUqFEzHVQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKuKjyUpJOMdDCjGmo1tYc6sA3r69VAXpvzhMJ7EZSHtb9C9Sw@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2299 bytes --]
>>>I would be OK with $100 transaction fee
Unless you're relying upon some hypothetical hyper-inflation of the USD,
how does one accept or justify such fees given the title (and intentions)
of Satoshi's own white paper and corresponding software?
I believe the key words "cash system" must be kept in mind throughout all
of these discussions and developments, or else we risk turning Bitcoin into
something other than cash.
Bitcoin will no longer be a P2P cash system if the fees make transactions
prohibitively expensive for all but the wealthiest of individuals and
corporations.
I understand that a careful balance must be struck between (measurable?)
decentralization and Bitcoin's use as an actual cash system; however, those
who are willing to annihilate the latter to maintain ONLY the former must
at least be honest with everyone that they really don't care if Bitcoin
becomes something entirely different than Satoshi's original invention and
intention.
Call it a necessary transformation or reinvention, and by a new name, if
you will; because, with exorbitant fees, it may no longer be accurate or
appropriate to call it Bitcoin: A Peer-to-peer Electronic CASH System.
Respectfully,
Oliver
On Aug 30, 2015 2:38 AM, "Adam Ritter via bitcoin-dev" <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> I don't really see any problem with the paper:
> All it states is that having the assumption that miners don't
> centralize, transaction fees don't go to zero even without the
> blocksize limit. I think we can accept this as a nice academic
> research, and I believe that it's true.
> Still, it doesn't have anything that is practical for me as an user of
> the Bitcoin network (I use it for storing long-term purchase value, as
> most of the people who I know): it doesn't help me if I still need to
> pay transaction fees after the blocksize limit is gone. My (and other
> users') main concern is about centralization, which has nothing to do
> with transaction fees. I would be OK with $100 transaction fee as
> well, as long as the network is fair and secure (which comes from
> decentralization).
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2953 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-09-01 2:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CAEgR2PFB3h_8fr=d8HegRSD0XdooimhFKtLR4vKr2QXv+EwBfQ@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <AD284610-4F40-445C-A074-CC94EDFFCBA8@gmx.com>
2015-08-30 3:25 ` [bitcoin-dev] Your Gmaxwell exchange Gregory Maxwell
2015-08-30 4:13 ` Peter R
2015-08-30 4:57 ` Gregory Maxwell
2015-08-30 6:38 ` Adam Ritter
2015-08-31 18:55 ` Justus Ranvier
2015-08-31 19:11 ` Mike Hearn
2015-09-01 20:29 ` Wladimir J. van der Laan
2015-09-02 18:51 ` Justus Ranvier
2015-09-01 2:30 ` Oliver Petruzel [this message]
2015-08-30 7:41 ` Peter R
2015-08-31 20:06 Monarch
2015-08-31 20:27 ` Justus Ranvier
2015-08-31 20:48 ` Monarch
2015-08-31 21:24 ` Allen Piscitello
2015-08-31 21:42 ` Monarch
2015-08-31 21:54 ` Justus Ranvier
2015-08-31 22:53 ` Monarch
2015-08-31 23:24 ` Justus Ranvier
2015-09-01 0:02 ` Milly Bitcoin
2015-09-01 9:25 ` Jorge Timón
2015-08-31 23:32 ` Peter R
2015-08-31 23:47 ` s7r
2015-09-01 11:44 ` Monarch
2015-09-01 11:11 ` Monarch
2015-09-01 15:59 ` Dave Collins
2015-09-01 16:51 ` Monarch
2015-09-01 18:37 ` Eric Voskuil
2015-09-01 20:08 ` Monarch
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='CALhpmH2yH1csM8=sodLN5bdSm-hhoWsNVxHPHHsGRYUqFEzHVQ@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=opetruzel@gmail.com \
--cc=aritter@gmail.com \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
/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