On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 12:44:11PM +0200, Kate Salazar via bitcoin-dev wrote: > > On an idealistic level, I agree with Keagan that it would make sense to > > have "a balance of fees to that effect". I think doing that would be > > technically/economically optimal. However, I think there is an enormous > > benefit to having a cultural aversion to monetary inflation and the > > consequences of convincing the bitcoin community that inflation is ok could > > have unintended negative consequences (not to mention how difficult > > convincing the community would be in the first place). There's also the > > economic distortion that inflation causes that has a negative effect which > > should also be considered. The idea of decaying utxo value is interesting > > to consider, but it would not solve the economic distortion that > > monetary inflation causes, because that distortion is a result of monetary > > devaluation (which decaying utxos would be a form of). Then again, maybe in > > this case the distortion of inflation would actually be a correction - > > correcting for the externality of benefit received by holders. I'm > > stream-of-consciousnessing a bit, but anyways, I suspect its not worth the > > trouble to perfect the distribution of bitcoin blockchain security costs to > > include holders. Tho, if I were to go back in time and influence how > > bitcoin was designed, I might advocate for it. > > > > Pool operators are free to request larger fees from older utxos, or from > all utxos, or from newer utxos, at their judgement, looking at the > blockspace demand census and at what the other pool operators are doing. > This is not consensus, it's policy. It's not a technology problem, it's > solved above in the social layer.
If pool operators can easily collude like you are proposing, we have a serious problem with pool centralization. What you would actually expect in a healthy Bitcoin ecosystem is for some pool operators to defect, and them winding up mining those transactions for market-based fees, eventually forcing the pool operators who are trying to charge a discriminatory premium to give up. -- https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
