Pages:
Author

Topic: Funding of network security with infinite block sizes - page 10. (Read 24528 times)

hero member
Activity: 616
Merit: 500
On the terminology: https://mises.org/daily/908

His arguments seem to be based on an oversimplification, so I'm not sure I buy them. Where does velocity of money and 'real' value of the transactions come in to play?


Yeah, you can do that even today - that's the beauty of it. Just fork the code. Or find somebody that can do it for you.
Of course the market would quickly verify your claims and pick a winner.

Would be a bit pointless to do that without any community support though, right?  Smiley

Doesn't matter. The more money are gaining on value, the better. Deflation is good for the economy, contrary to popular beliefs. And Bitcoin will be the perfect proof of that.

That may be true - but I still contend that you can have real deflation alongside monetary inflation (this is evidently true, as it's the situation we're in now). And even then, you still need to figure out a way to pay the miners fairly (the original point of this thread).

On a separate note, consider this:

If you're holding Bitcoins but not spending them, you're still using the services of the bitcoin network. The service being - in this case - storing your captial. You're relying on the activity in the network around you (the miners) to hold the value of that capital. Why shouldn't you pay for that service?
legendary
Activity: 1470
Merit: 1005
Bringing Legendary Har® to you since 1952

Bitcoin's inflation rate is practically a HOLY rule of Bitcoin.
If you ever try to change it, hard fork, major havoc and panic on the market are unevitable.

So what you are asking for is impossible to do. I for sure, would immediately leave (or rather: switch to the proper fork) after somebody tried to mess with the holy rule.


I can accept that - and if it were ever to come to a hard fork the majority would win. That's the beauty of Bitcoin, right?

Yeah, you can do that even today - that's the beauty of it. Just fork the code. Or find somebody that can do it for you.
Of course the market would quickly verify your claims and pick a winner.

I don't think you understand what "money supply" actually means. Or perhaps you don't understand what money is and what it stands for at all.

The point is monetary inflation doesn't imply real inflation.

Doesn't matter. The more money are gaining on value, the better. Deflation is good for the economy, contrary to popular beliefs. And Bitcoin will be the perfect proof of that.
hero member
Activity: 616
Merit: 500

Bitcoin's inflation rate is practically a HOLY rule of Bitcoin.
If you ever try to change it, hard fork, major havoc and panic on the market are unevitable.

So what you are asking for is impossible to do. I for sure, would immediately leave (or rather: switch to the proper fork) after somebody tried to mess with the holy rule.


I can accept that - and if it were ever to come to a hard fork the majority would win. That's the beauty of Bitcoin, right?

I don't think you understand what "money supply" actually means. Or perhaps you don't understand what money is and what it stands for at all.

Yes, I do. Right now, the money supply of Bitcoin is increasing, and yet its purchasing power is also increasing. We have monetary inflation, along with deflation in real terms.

The point is monetary inflation doesn't imply real inflation.

I'm going to stop there, because I'm feeling like I've hijacked this thread... I'm sure this debate could still be of interest to others in the community, though, particularly those who want to see a flourishing Bitcoin economy, not just a store of value.
legendary
Activity: 1470
Merit: 1005
Bringing Legendary Har® to you since 1952
Also, increasing the money supply doesn't always mean inflation...

Sure it does. That's the very definition of monetary inflation.

we have an increasing money supply now, and massive deflation!

You're confusing monetary inflation with price increases.

I mean inflation in this sense:
https://www.google.com/search?q=define%3A+inflation

Bitcoin's inflation rate is practically a HOLY rule of Bitcoin.
If you ever try to change it, hard fork, major havoc and panic on the market are unevitable.

So what you are asking for is impossible to do. I for sure, would immediately leave (or rather: switch to the proper fork) after somebody tried to mess with the holy rule.

If the purchasing power of your money is increasing, why do you care about the money supply?

I don't think you understand what "money supply" actually means. Or perhaps you don't understand what money is and what it stands for at all.
hero member
Activity: 616
Merit: 500
Also, increasing the money supply doesn't always mean inflation...

Sure it does. That's the very definition of monetary inflation.

we have an increasing money supply now, and massive deflation!

You're confusing monetary inflation with price increases.

I mean inflation in this sense:
https://www.google.com/search?q=define%3A+inflation

If the purchasing power of your money is increasing, why do you care about the money supply?
legendary
Activity: 1106
Merit: 1004
That may be, but it's also an elegant way to reward the miners

Inflation is not elegant at all. It's the worst way to charge people. It's disguised, distributes its load on people who are not creating the load, etc. Even in the context of a voluntary currency, it's almost dishonest. In the context of legal tender, it being theft is not a "fundamentalist stance", it's a fact.

Also, increasing the money supply doesn't always mean inflation...

Sure it does. That's the very definition of monetary inflation.

we have an increasing money supply now, and massive deflation!

You're confusing monetary inflation with price increases.
hero member
Activity: 616
Merit: 500
The inflation rate will not be changed. Period.
Deal with it.

From what I've read, the arguments against increasing inflation just seem to be a fundamentalist "NO - inflation is theft" stance. That may be, but it's also an elegant way to reward the miners - the people who make the whole bitcoin system work. Also, increasing the money supply doesn't always mean inflation... we have an increasing money supply now, and massive deflation!

As someone who's trying to start a business in the bitcoin economy, I just want to make bitcoin the best currency it can be. That means being a great medium of exchange, not just a store of value.

legendary
Activity: 1470
Merit: 1005
Bringing Legendary Har® to you since 1952
Maybe there is a market-based way to set the inflation rate? Say the BTC transacted (or fees) in a block is low, then newly mined coins could be used to top the reward up to an acceptable amount. The 'acceptable amount' needs to be something high enough to cover the miner's expenses - this could be decided based on the hashrate, perhaps.

The leap of logic here is that More Txs => More Fees though. Of course with the free riders problem, this isn't necessarily the case.
Please go find and read 100 threads that have talked about changing the total number of BTC and then come back.

The inflation rate will not be changed. Period.
Deal with it.
sr. member
Activity: 455
Merit: 250
You Don't Bitcoin 'till You Mint Coin
Leaned something new today: Assurance Contract

Though I'm still having a difficult time seeing how this
could be implemented in a simple manner for Bitcoin.

There's one idea I've had (I post it here because it seems to relate.....maybe)

I would like the ability to pay fees not just to the miner who solved the block
but to the miners of the following X number of blocks. Doesn't seem to controversial
and easy to implement. Fees are still kind of free and for those that do pay a decent
amount, it would be nice to have a choice to break up those fees over the next
10, 100, 1000, even 10,000+ blocks.
hero member
Activity: 616
Merit: 500
Maybe there is a market-based way to set the inflation rate? Say the BTC transacted (or fees) in a block is low, then newly mined coins could be used to top the reward up to an acceptable amount. The 'acceptable amount' needs to be something high enough to cover the miner's expenses - this could be decided based on the hashrate, perhaps.

The leap of logic here is that More Txs => More Fees though. Of course with the free riders problem, this isn't necessarily the case.
legendary
Activity: 1106
Merit: 1004
This assurance contract theory is interesting, but I don't view merchants themselves doing the pledges.
Perhaps insurance+assurance would work better. The merchant only wants to be sure he won't be defrauded. He pays an insurance contract for his transactions. Insurers want to make sure the network has enough hash rate to make it unlikely that many of their insured transactions get double-spent, so they may start these pledges. Other insurers may contribute.

I don't think merchants themselves would start the pledges because that would involve complex calculations (how much is enough?) whose results would change frequently. Merchants wouldn't want to be bothered with such things.
legendary
Activity: 1106
Merit: 1004
Wouldn't things be much simpler if Bitcoin inflation were allowed to continue past 21m BTC?

The whole point of all these discussions is to come up with spontaneous/natural/market-based ways to finance the work that is done for the blockchain, and not just arbitrarly pick some magic numbers or formulas and impose them via the protocol.

The inflation rate is necessarily an "arbitrary formula". Satoshi was wise to put an asymptotic cap on it.

If you use an arbitrary number/formula, there's just no way of knowing if this number really reflects the amount of security the network needs. It's likely to be higher (but it can also be lower), meaning that the resources being spent on such security would be better spent elsewhere (or are not enough). It's the knowledge problem Hayek talks about. You'd have to be omniscient to know what's the optimal formula, and it would need to change constantly.

Finally, inflation is even worse than just an arbitrary transaction fee, as you don't put the load on those who create the load. You force every holder to pay, regardless of how many UTXO they're creating.
legendary
Activity: 1470
Merit: 1005
Bringing Legendary Har® to you since 1952
Wouldn't things be much simpler if Bitcoin inflation were allowed to continue past 21m BTC?

hero member
Activity: 616
Merit: 500
Wouldn't things be much simpler if Bitcoin inflation were allowed to continue past 21m BTC?
legendary
Activity: 1232
Merit: 1084
Why is this debacle so long and painful ? Maybe we should do one of these and if it doesn't work, try the next in the row ?

Any change to the rules needs to have potential exploits considered.  If you change the rules of the game, then you end up with a different result.
legendary
Activity: 2940
Merit: 1090
If it is changeable it can be manipulated and you are basically asking the wolves and sheep to vote, using the sharpness of their teeth as the value of their votes...

You might as well just decide outright mining is something only first world nations and fortune ten or fortune 25 or so companies should be able to afford, maybe with a few telecom corps that own lots of cable even without being in the fortune 25.

Heck having the governments do it makes a lot of sense to a lot of companies maybe, as it puts the cost onto the taxpayers instead of having to pay it directly themselves... Since that would increase government control over the money maybe politicians would agree with that...

Unlimited basically means who ever wins the next world war or world currency war controls a monopoly on it... and invites that war to please commence...

-MarkM-
legendary
Activity: 1078
Merit: 1002
100 satoshis -> ISO code
Is this problem of block size really so complex ? Maybe you are all overcomplicating simple things.

Can't it be solved by using one of following ways ?:

1. Miners VOTE for the next block size every X blocks, using special transactions, extra data put in previously mined blocks or whatever OR
2. Block size is AUTOMATICALLY calculated every Y blocks using some relatively simple algo (like basing on how full previous blocks were) ?

Why is this debacle so long and painful ? Maybe we should do one of these and if it doesn't work, try the next in the row ?

2. [max] Block size is AUTOMATICALLY calculated...

I agree.
I think option 2. is the simplest and most effective solution to the roadblock of the current fixed limit. I am all for scaling for demand, but scaling for infinity is just going to the opposite extreme.

There is a magic block size around 10MB where the fees market will work properly because they start to exceed the block reward. The existing fee structure, which also allows for some zero-rated transactions, seems to be proving itself in the field as overall fees are slowly increasing anyway. Why don't we let this organic growth continue by employing option 2 soon?
newbie
Activity: 14
Merit: 0
OK clearly some creative solutions might be needed in the interim, that's granted.  But, when and if Bitcoin achieves a really wide level of adoption - let's say a Facebook level - and of course the effects of Moore's law - what if the client was re-writen to require everybody that's running it to do a little mining?  I'm not a mathematician but I bet there is one on the forum that can tell if this is viable...  Let's just say Bitcoin has a billion users and each and every one of them dedicates 10-20% of their CPU power for a couple of hours per day - would that be enough to support the network?
legendary
Activity: 1232
Merit: 1084
I'd imagined that for most businesses they'd just constantly take part in the contracts rather than try to match up pledges with pending payments precisely. Even if you try to only take part when there's an inbound payment, why would you pledge for block X+1 instead of the same block in which your transaction occurs?

Block X+1 also secures your transaction.  You are paying to get your transaction secured with a certain number of hashes.  This may require multiple blocks.
Pages:
Jump to: