Might as well post this here...
not sure how you can be into bitcoin, and at the same time be as closed minded as you are. determining the block size by targeting a tx fee limit is the most fucktarded idea I've come accross with so far.
Topic: block limit, high fees Vs centralization. - page 2. (Read 1012 times)
based on the default fee settings. That being said, this doesn't seem like a bad idea at all...
So, a centralized source would declare a "default fee setting", and any time that source decided to change the default fee setting, there would be a new hard fork released that would change the blocksize calculation?
No. No need for a centralized source to have a default fee setting, Bitcoin Core has it. From there, the fee could be calculated as per OP's suggestion using a method similar to the fee estimation that already exists on the reference client. Or is this impossible to implement?
how about miners determine the fee by voting with the coinbase code thing!
they are already in control as to what fee they require to include your TX, so make them vote and take the mean or avg or wtv of the votes, and use that as the "target fee" and have the block size calculation revolve around that.
Booya we solved it, call the devs!
lmao
they are already in control as to what fee they require to include your TX, so make them vote and take the mean or avg or wtv of the votes, and use that as the "target fee" and have the block size calculation revolve around that.
Booya we solved it, call the devs!
lmaoThat could work, but it would raise again the discussion about "miners already have too much control". And there would be a conflict of interests, I think, as miners profit on bigger fees...
Might as well post this here...
determining the block size by targeting a tx fee limit is the most fucktarded idea I've come accross with so far.
The future of fees is uncertain, and the possibility of having them raise quite a bit causes discussions on this matter... I'd classify ideas like this as extreme, on the limit. Only the future will tell us if these are "fucktarded" ideas
No. I will not sugarcoat these ideas because they are dangerous.
Making decisions on the security of a billion $ network based on targeting a certain transaction fee is the definition of "fucktarded"
based on the default fee settings. That being said, this doesn't seem like a bad idea at all...
So, a centralized source would declare a "default fee setting", and any time that source decided to change the default fee setting, there would be a new hard fork released that would change the blocksize calculation?
No. No need for a centralized source to have a default fee setting, Bitcoin Core has it. From there, the fee could be calculated as per OP's suggestion using a method similar to the fee estimation that already exists on the reference client. Or is this impossible to implement?
how about miners determine the fee by voting with the coinbase code thing!
they are already in control as to what fee they require to include your TX, so make them vote and take the mean or avg or wtv of the votes, and use that as the "target fee" and have the block size calculation revolve around that.
Booya we solved it, call the devs! lmao
they are already in control as to what fee they require to include your TX, so make them vote and take the mean or avg or wtv of the votes, and use that as the "target fee" and have the block size calculation revolve around that.
Booya we solved it, call the devs!
lmaoThat could work, but it would raise again the discussion about "miners already have too much control". And there would be a conflict of interests, I think, as miners profit on bigger fees...
Might as well post this here...
determining the block size by targeting a tx fee limit is the most fucktarded idea I've come accross with so far.
The future of fees is uncertain, and the possibility of having them raise quite a bit causes discussions on this matter... I'd classify ideas like this as extreme, on the limit. Only the future will tell us if these are "fucktarded" ideas
Might as well post this here...
determining the block size by targeting a tx fee limit is the most fucktarded idea I've come accross with so far.
based on the default fee settings. That being said, this doesn't seem like a bad idea at all...
So, a centralized source would declare a "default fee setting", and any time that source decided to change the default fee setting, there would be a new hard fork released that would change the blocksize calculation?
they are already in control as to what fee they require to include your TX, so make them vote and take the mean or avg or wtv of the votes, and use that as the "target fee" and have the block size calculation revolve around that.
Booya we solved it, call the devs!
lmao 
based on the default fee settings. That being said, this doesn't seem like a bad idea at all...
So, a centralized source would declare a "default fee setting", and any time that source decided to change the default fee setting, there would be a new hard fork released that would change the blocksize calculation?
if we keep the 1MB limit fees go up but mining is easy even with a really crappy internet connection "more decentralized higher fee"
if we up the limit to 32MB fees remain unaffected (very low) but you need a reasonable internet connection to mine "more centralized lower fee"
what if we could use the block limit to make sure fees are always ~5cent
if the avg fee is <4 cents lower the the limit
if the avg fee is >6 cents up the limit
simple enough.
this way block limit will increase with demand and is sure to be as low as it can be to allow for free TX being processed but free TX will always take alot of time because most blocks are filled with TX that have a fee, and that's the reason poeple pay fee to make sure they get confirmed ASAP.
the balance between decentralized and low fees is always such that free TX are slow but possible
cool no?
if we up the limit to 32MB fees remain unaffected (very low) but you need a reasonable internet connection to mine "more centralized lower fee"
what if we could use the block limit to make sure fees are always ~5cent
if the avg fee is <4 cents lower the the limit
if the avg fee is >6 cents up the limit
simple enough.
this way block limit will increase with demand and is sure to be as low as it can be to allow for free TX being processed but free TX will always take alot of time because most blocks are filled with TX that have a fee, and that's the reason poeple pay fee to make sure they get confirmed ASAP.
the balance between decentralized and low fees is always such that free TX are slow but possible
cool no?
Wouldn't that require a centralized service to determine how to calculate the current exchange rate?
I think adamstgBit was referring figuratively to these "cents". The calculation could be tied to an amount in Bitcoin, based on the default fee settings. That being said, this doesn't seem like a bad idea at all...
if we keep the 1MB limit fees go up but mining is easy even with a really crappy internet connection "more decentralized higher fee"
if we up the limit to 32MB fees remain unaffected (very low) but you need a reasonable internet connection to mine "more centralized lower fee"
what if we could use the block limit to make sure fees are always ~5cent
if the avg fee is <4 cents lower the the limit
if the avg fee is >6 cents up the limit
simple enough.
this way block limit will increase with demand and is sure to be as low as it can be to allow for free TX being processed but free TX will always take alot of time because most blocks are filled with TX that have a fee, and that's the reason poeple pay fee to make sure they get confirmed ASAP.
the balance between decentralized and low fees is always such that free TX are slow but possible
cool no?
if we up the limit to 32MB fees remain unaffected (very low) but you need a reasonable internet connection to mine "more centralized lower fee"
what if we could use the block limit to make sure fees are always ~5cent
if the avg fee is <4 cents lower the the limit
if the avg fee is >6 cents up the limit
simple enough.
this way block limit will increase with demand and is sure to be as low as it can be to allow for free TX being processed but free TX will always take alot of time because most blocks are filled with TX that have a fee, and that's the reason poeple pay fee to make sure they get confirmed ASAP.
the balance between decentralized and low fees is always such that free TX are slow but possible
cool no?
Wouldn't that require a centralized service to determine how to calculate the current exchange rate?
if we keep the 1MB limit fees go up but mining is easy even with a really crappy internet connection "more decentralized higher fee"
if we up the limit to 32MB fees remain unaffected (very low) but you need a reasonable internet connection to mine "more centralized lower fee"
what if we could use the block limit to make sure fees are always ~5cent
if the avg fee is <4 cents lower the the limit
if the avg fee is >6 cents up the limit
simple enough.
this way block limit will increase with demand and is sure to be as low as it can be to allow for free TX being processed but free TX will always take alot of time because most blocks are filled with TX that have a fee, and that's the reason poeple pay fee to make sure they get confirmed ASAP.
the balance between decentralized and low fees is always such that free TX are slow but possible
cool no?
if we up the limit to 32MB fees remain unaffected (very low) but you need a reasonable internet connection to mine "more centralized lower fee"
what if we could use the block limit to make sure fees are always ~5cent
if the avg fee is <4 cents lower the the limit
if the avg fee is >6 cents up the limit
simple enough.
this way block limit will increase with demand and is sure to be as low as it can be to allow for free TX being processed but free TX will always take alot of time because most blocks are filled with TX that have a fee, and that's the reason poeple pay fee to make sure they get confirmed ASAP.
the balance between decentralized and low fees is always such that free TX are slow but possible
cool no?
Jump to: