📅 Original date posted:2015-07-24 📝 Original message:On Jul 24, 2015 8:30 AM, ...

Jorge Timón [ARCHIVE] /

npub1fx9…l2d8

2023-06-07 15:43:02

in reply to nevent1q…zlzs

📅 Original date posted:2015-07-24
📝 Original message:On Jul 24, 2015 8:30 AM, "Tom Harding" <tomh at thinlink.com> wrote:
>
> On 7/23/2015 10:51 AM, Jorge Timón wrote:
> > We know perfectly well that the system will need to eventually be
> > sustained by fees.
>
> Fee revenue can rise just as easily without increased BTC fee rates.
>
> Two avenues that are just as effective: increased exchange rate,
> increased number of fee-paying transactions. Neither of these avenues
> benefits from increased "fee pressure" (scarcity of block space).
>

Why do you expect users to "increase the number of fee-paying transactions"
if their free transactions reliably get mined relatively fast?
And if it's good that they pay fees, why is not good when the reason they
do it is because there's limited space in the block? Is user's paying fees
soon a good thing or the "catastrophe" we need to avoid by rising the block
size, what is it? Or is there something else wrong with having a limit
other than "fees will hurt short-term adoption"? I'm confused about your
position now...

Regarding "increasing the exchange rate" it would be really nice to just
push a button and double bitcoin's price just before the next subsidy
halving, but unfortunately that's something out of our control.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150724/f546c1a4/attachment.html>;

Author Public Key

npub1fx98zxt3lzspjs5f4msr0fxysx5euucm29ghysryju7vpc9j0jzqtcl2d8

Show more details

Published at

2023-06-07 15:43:02

Kind type

1 Short Text Note

Event JSON

{ "id": "2876755f60d03e9fccb755802f510d5394db929e9a5c5c71731e4d8619ba77f9", "pubkey": "498a711971f8a0194289aee037a4c481a99e731b5151724064973cc0e0b27c84", "created_at": 1686152582, "kind": 1, "tags": [ [ "e", "95a36d78d6bf18f4b8ede735f044f5cc9630ae9f0b1198d008835777ff84eede", "", "root" ], [ "e", "4ddc4dddf0a6b53c02e5d1b9abe3bb6bbded856a2fbc9a719e60be999bf19382", "", "reply" ], [ "p", "dc329a02c970aabf03b87185ef51c86afe4586fe3a148508af898af3fabc56a3" ] ], "content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-07-24\n📝 Original message:On Jul 24, 2015 8:30 AM, \"Tom Harding\" \u003ctomh at thinlink.com\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\n\u003e On 7/23/2015 10:51 AM, Jorge Timón wrote:\n\u003e \u003e We know perfectly well that the system will need to eventually be\n\u003e \u003e sustained by fees.\n\u003e\n\u003e Fee revenue can rise just as easily without increased BTC fee rates.\n\u003e\n\u003e Two avenues that are just as effective: increased exchange rate,\n\u003e increased number of fee-paying transactions. Neither of these avenues\n\u003e benefits from increased \"fee pressure\" (scarcity of block space).\n\u003e\n\nWhy do you expect users to \"increase the number of fee-paying transactions\"\nif their free transactions reliably get mined relatively fast?\nAnd if it's good that they pay fees, why is not good when the reason they\ndo it is because there's limited space in the block? Is user's paying fees\nsoon a good thing or the \"catastrophe\" we need to avoid by rising the block\nsize, what is it? Or is there something else wrong with having a limit\nother than \"fees will hurt short-term adoption\"? I'm confused about your\nposition now...\n\nRegarding \"increasing the exchange rate\" it would be really nice to just\npush a button and double bitcoin's price just before the next subsidy\nhalving, but unfortunately that's something out of our control.\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150724/f546c1a4/attachment.html\u003e", "sig": "729318e1b0cd119a64ce8617f7e1d37b7db405f676f231032488653937ab761bb6c06241db4bdd01e47da58ad2214204846c1585f968e5c86cea6208af81d1a3" }