Hi Peter, > Only because the block reward goes away. If it was made to continue > indefinitely - most likely with an inflation hard fork - demand for block > space > would not be critical to Bitcoin's security.
I am not completely against your proposal although 100% sure this will not have "consensus" to be implemented. I think if bitcoin doesn't have enough demand for block space, it should die. I will be sad if bitcoin doesn't exist but it should be a lesson for all the people opposing soft forks based on drama and politics instead of technical review. I don't see anything wrong with users paying 100x fees for opening and closing LN channels. /dev/fd0 Sent with Proton Mail secure email. ------- Original Message ------- On Sunday, June 12th, 2022 at 9:06 AM, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 06, 2022 at 09:02:18AM -0400, Erik Aronesty via bitcoin-dev wrote: > > > Maintaining the security of the protocol is squarely the responsibility of > > the Bitcoin software and the core developers > > > > Continued demand for block space is critical for Bitcoin's security. > > > Only because the block reward goes away. If it was made to continue > indefinitely - most likely with an inflation hard fork - demand for block > space > would not be critical to Bitcoin's security. > > -- > https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
