📅 Original date posted:2015-05-08
📝 Original message:On 5/7/2015 6:40 AM, Jorge Timón wrote:
>> Known: There's a major problem looming for miners at the next block reward
>> halving. Many are already in a bad place and without meaningful fees then
>> sans a 2x increase in the USD:BTC ratio then many will simply have to leave
>> the network, increasing centralisation risks. There seems to be a fairly
>> pervasive assumption that the 300-ish MW of power that they currently use is
>> going to pay for itself (ignoring capital and other operating costs).
> I take this as an argument for increasing fee competition and thus,
> against increasing the block size.
>
That doesn't follow. Supposing average fees per transaction decrease
with block size, total fees / block reach an optimum somewhere. While
the optimum might be at infinity, it's certainly not at zero, and it's
not at all obvious that the optimum is at a block size lower than 1MB.
Tom Harding [ARCHIVE] /
npub1ms…pmwjy
2023-06-07 15:33:28
in reply to nevent1q…m2x5
Author Public Key
npub1msef5qkfwz4t7qacwxz775wgdtlytph78g2g2z903x90874u263sypmwjyPublished at
2023-06-07 15:33:28Event JSON
{
"id": "1c42d0be0bb290405350a5ca70daca0e81e0230c573eab39680f01184a24e4a9",
"pubkey": "dc329a02c970aabf03b87185ef51c86afe4586fe3a148508af898af3fabc56a3",
"created_at": 1686152008,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"0def597b074aa190bf159e12f9433ea74d157ee52321b38d195ba644ad5c177f",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"7c6bd6df5bd8d442c350e726213527d4d2859b5d2cef4c2c0f3a73b02eec41b9",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"498a711971f8a0194289aee037a4c481a99e731b5151724064973cc0e0b27c84"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-05-08\n📝 Original message:On 5/7/2015 6:40 AM, Jorge Timón wrote:\n\u003e\u003e Known: There's a major problem looming for miners at the next block reward\n\u003e\u003e halving. Many are already in a bad place and without meaningful fees then\n\u003e\u003e sans a 2x increase in the USD:BTC ratio then many will simply have to leave\n\u003e\u003e the network, increasing centralisation risks. There seems to be a fairly\n\u003e\u003e pervasive assumption that the 300-ish MW of power that they currently use is\n\u003e\u003e going to pay for itself (ignoring capital and other operating costs).\n\u003e I take this as an argument for increasing fee competition and thus,\n\u003e against increasing the block size.\n\u003e\n\nThat doesn't follow. Supposing average fees per transaction decrease\nwith block size, total fees / block reach an optimum somewhere. While\nthe optimum might be at infinity, it's certainly not at zero, and it's\nnot at all obvious that the optimum is at a block size lower than 1MB.",
"sig": "c9db57e7c314048663bc5c733813d57c606801f3063aadb86e678c92e908d05ff22ad4039fb2a85ca7faea113e7209515a4aba023064bf7864deb0c40605d1dd"
}