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 1FE1DDA2 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 17:47:56 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail2.protonmail.ch (mail2.protonmail.ch [185.70.40.22]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 189E712D for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 17:47:54 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 12:47:50 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com; s=default; t=1518457671; bh=Qw/GPaT4+kr/qgVY7STpGCTeAccPDFA7esMg3PRxXvc=; h=Date:To:From:Cc:Reply-To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References: Feedback-ID:From; b=xNJyP9cFSs/sllKCIhVPZ5a6bM+5DeA16PEpnCXbSm042+g3p4WYCAMjzlcMLbUCH f4oV6yIYPf5NuZb8+KTwfUkkRRxC95iq4iH4XptaQ7CsMBFjrDbetA2qwYj//mWn42 UVEUxrNcV0m1K4GYwlgCPp7bZJ1NyRmcDJQblFyI= To: Melvin Carvalho From: rhavar@protonmail.com Reply-To: rhavar@protonmail.com Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Feedback-ID: RdfuD--Ffc-FNb_4UIG1XA3s5stj1f6Yt84KENdha_3WoiW3STYpu7X5uGR72LvTfQZpxEhSRHGSlNfV5XM5RA==:Ext:ProtonMail MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, LOTS_OF_MONEY, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, T_MONEY_PERCENT 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: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 17:58:05 +0000 Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Subject: Re: [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: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 17:47:56 -0000 > This lead me to ponder whether the intuitive metric of satoshi/byte is, i= n fact, game >theory optimal.=C2=A0 Possibly over the short term it is, but over a longe= r period, those > wishing to increase the longevity of proof of work in general might wish = to consider > more progressive fee approaches.=C2=A0 The constraining factor for blocks is the max-block weight. So miners are a= lready optimizing for the right thing (creating a block that gives the most= immediate reward). If miners want to start a cartel-like behavior of charg= ing more for more value-transfer it would be incredibly harmful and even li= kely promote centralization (the cartel would likely not look kindly on any= miner who doesn't follow their rules, and perhaps start orphaning their bl= ocks). Now I guess in theory you could add consensus rules that apply restrictions= on the amount of "value transfer" in a block, such that miners are motivat= ed to charge more for high-value transactions. However there's going to be = almost 0 appetite from anyone to want to do anything like this, and the amo= unt of unintended and harmful side effects would be profound. (Personally,= I'd lose any interest in bitcoin if such a change was ever instated) =E2=80=8B-Ryan =E2=80=8B -------- Original Message -------- On February 12, 2018 12:23 PM, Melvin Carvalho via bitcoin-dev wrote: > > >On 21 December 2017 at 22:30, Melvin Carvalho w= rote: >>I asked adam back at hcpp how the block chain would be secured in the lon= g term, once the reward goes away.=C2=A0 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 no= w 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 the= re is some legitimate concern that the fee per tx is prohibitive for some u= se 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.=C2=A0 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.=C2= =A0 Though if further discussion is deemed appropriate, it would be interes= ting to hear thoughts. >> >Just following up on this, for no other reason than I've had my eyes glued= to these stats the last few weeks.=C2=A0 I'll share a few more stats links= . >Mempool has come down significantly, as have fees.=C2=A0 Tho, of course, t= his could spike any time.=C2=A0=20 > >https://bitinfocharts.com/bitcoin/ >Typically fees are : > >=C2=A0$2.06 on tx $543 (median) # 0.38% >=C2=A0$3.47 on tx $75,000 (mean) # 0.005% >Aside: An observation on this.=C2=A0 High value transactors seems to be ge= tting a much better deal, than the mean.=C2=A0 This lead me to ponder wheth= er the intuitive metric of satoshi/byte is, in fact, game theory optimal.= =C2=A0 Possibly over the short term it is, but over a longer period, those = wishing to increase the longevity of proof of work in general might wish to= consider more progressive fee approaches.=C2=A0 Naively, it might be possi= ble to imagine some kind of gaussian distribution that picks tx according t= o a blended combination of sats/byte and %transacted.=C2=A0 Perhaps somethi= ng for miners and fee estimation algorithms to develop over time. >Segwit adoption has increased, and anecdotal evidence shows that trend to = continue.=C2=A0 The release of 0.16 will I think also have a positive effec= t. >Finally, I came across this wonderful site that shows lightning network ad= option on mainnet > >http://shabang.io/ >LN is increasing well.=C2=A0 Some blocks are not far off 1% lightning fund= ing, which I think bodes well.=C2=A0 I'll go out on a limb and predict that= over 1% of btc tx will be lightning based by year end. >Since such posts are not strictly development, I'll keep them to a minimum= .=C2=A0 However, I hope these stats provide useful data points for project = evolution. > >