📅 Original date posted:2017-03-30
📝 Original message:On 3/30/2017 9:14 AM, David Vorick wrote:
> On Mar 30, 2017 12:04 PM, "Tom Harding via bitcoin-dev"
> <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> <mailto:bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org>> wrote:
>
> Raystonn,
>
> Your logic is very hard to dispute. An important special case is
> small miners.
>
> Small miners use pools exactly because they want smaller, more
> frequent payments.
>
> Rising fees force them to take payments less frequently, and will
> only tend to make more of them give up.
>
> With fees rising superlinearly, this centralizing effect is much
> stronger than the oft-cited worry of small miners joining large
> pools to decrease orphan rates.
>
>
> Miners get paid on average once every ten minutes. The size of fees
> and the number of fee transactions does not change the payout rate.
>
> Further, we are very far from the point (in my appraisal) where fees
> are high enough to block home users from using the network.
>
> Bitcoin has many high-value use cases such as savings. We should not
> throw away the core innovation of monetary sovereignty in pursuit of
> supporting 0.1% of the world's daily transactions.
>
Owners of small mining rigs get paid by pools, generally using regular
transactions that pay regular fees (p2pool is an exception that pays
directly from coinbase). The point is the unintended consequences are
directly at odds with one of the justifications offered for small blocks
- miner centralization.
This is a special case. Raystonn's general point was that high fees
will lead to fewer economic actors overall, and therefore fewer full nodes.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20170330/1d2447b2/attachment.html>;
Tom Harding [ARCHIVE] /
npub1ms…pmwjy
2023-06-07 17:58:34
in reply to nevent1q…hft7
Author Public Key
npub1msef5qkfwz4t7qacwxz775wgdtlytph78g2g2z903x90874u263sypmwjyPublished at
2023-06-07 17:58:34Event JSON
{
"id": "6c488aa584e63775429236ba8d3a1e1590e2efc6cb87b98d3f9ac8a17d0785e3",
"pubkey": "dc329a02c970aabf03b87185ef51c86afe4586fe3a148508af898af3fabc56a3",
"created_at": 1686160714,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"845616cd1ad8e2d4086dc5d09435f968f9480d09c1d9014832a2f7d340aeb9b2",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"ccd327a84af3629322569099f7ff958c0ef71bdb613215159ba1e04276b87aa0",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"5562cca1329cae603b8b4b6965fe8bfb9c2e9f773c94e10b7f60bd8ae04a3cef"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2017-03-30\n📝 Original message:On 3/30/2017 9:14 AM, David Vorick wrote:\n\u003e On Mar 30, 2017 12:04 PM, \"Tom Harding via bitcoin-dev\"\n\u003e \u003cbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\n\u003e \u003cmailto:bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\n\u003e Raystonn, \n\u003e\n\u003e Your logic is very hard to dispute. An important special case is\n\u003e small miners.\n\u003e\n\u003e Small miners use pools exactly because they want smaller, more\n\u003e frequent payments.\n\u003e\n\u003e Rising fees force them to take payments less frequently, and will\n\u003e only tend to make more of them give up.\n\u003e\n\u003e With fees rising superlinearly, this centralizing effect is much\n\u003e stronger than the oft-cited worry of small miners joining large\n\u003e pools to decrease orphan rates.\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e Miners get paid on average once every ten minutes. The size of fees\n\u003e and the number of fee transactions does not change the payout rate.\n\u003e\n\u003e Further, we are very far from the point (in my appraisal) where fees\n\u003e are high enough to block home users from using the network.\n\u003e\n\u003e Bitcoin has many high-value use cases such as savings. We should not\n\u003e throw away the core innovation of monetary sovereignty in pursuit of\n\u003e supporting 0.1% of the world's daily transactions.\n\u003e\n\nOwners of small mining rigs get paid by pools, generally using regular\ntransactions that pay regular fees (p2pool is an exception that pays\ndirectly from coinbase). The point is the unintended consequences are\ndirectly at odds with one of the justifications offered for small blocks\n- miner centralization.\n\nThis is a special case. Raystonn's general point was that high fees\nwill lead to fewer economic actors overall, and therefore fewer full nodes.\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20170330/1d2447b2/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "12a83e6c1a1c58701de06a923cdd8a66f84117f8f01d207b9ac7d0fbce5a0e88f46c064c11b664346fd82f232aaf1ade647ce1cdb11a94a6f2a82d32c18b0ff7"
}