Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 12DFA268 for ; Thu, 30 Jul 2015 09:52:15 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mx1.riseup.net (mx1.riseup.net [198.252.153.129]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 420FDEA for ; Thu, 30 Jul 2015 09:52:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from piha.riseup.net (unknown [10.0.1.162]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.riseup.net", Issuer "COMODO RSA Domain Validation Secure Server CA" (verified OK)) by mx1.riseup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D0D3840FAD; Thu, 30 Jul 2015 09:52:13 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=riseup.net; s=squak; t=1438249933; bh=XYY67JGo43e3P9rC99zwJoQQijkXi11j7hxC2+l22Wk=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=Isk7doD/O0zWPFoc/fEhxiF741WNHveNqaEQJlTpdfMbXV3vWH0RKu+josxqcT+Xg pD4i6qHPw7pMrrUuWaROaqURiJtF4sE93oE38BSKJ6a9mXaS21fZVGJYMBn6zQJaAM eY+21a2Hda+b+cqCy99fN8cCzZZ2fNJkSUQP1Oi4= Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (Authenticated sender: odinn.cyberguerrilla) with ESMTPSA id AD370141C99 Message-ID: <55B9F3C5.7060302@riseup.net> Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 02:52:05 -0700 From: odinn User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: s7r@sky-ip.org, "Raystonn ." , Vali Zero , bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org References: <543015348.4948849.1438178962054.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> <55B959A2.9020402@sky-ip.org> In-Reply-To: <55B959A2.9020402@sky-ip.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.98.7 at mx1 X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FIN_FREE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RP_MATCHES_RCVD, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] =?utf-8?q?R=C4=83spuns=3A_Personal_opinion_on_the_f?= =?utf-8?q?ee_market_from_a_worried_local_trader?= X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 09:52:15 -0000 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Some additional points.... On 07/29/2015 03:54 PM, s7r via bitcoin-dev wrote: > (...) > > The more people use bitcoin, the more demand we have on the market > for BTC, the higher BTC/FIAT rate will be, more people will become > interested in mining and so on. Bitcoin is not a > rich-only-private-club, it's an open, global, decentralized payment > network. The less people use it... I guess you figured it out. Yes. (...) Having some > offchain solution for small transactions would be a good idea, but > this doesn't mean we should make small transactions impossible due > to absurd fees. This is correct also. > > On 7/29/2015 8:47 PM, Raystonn . via bitcoin-dev wrote: >>> When a category of users would get priced out because of the >>> fee >> market, they would be free to use any altcoin they want. >> >> I believe that pretty well sums up where we’re headed if >> transaction rate is artificially limited, whether that be by >> maximum block size limit or something else. A fee market will >> necessarily include more than just Bitcoin. The reality is it’s >> very easy to trade value across different blockchains, and thus a >> fee market will bleed value from Bitcoin and give it to >> alternative blockchains. If Bitcoin’s blocks are at maximum >> capacity, people will exchange for something that allows them to >> transact with a lesser fee, then make the desired payment. This >> adds value to the alternative blockchain and removes it from >> Bitcoin. >> >> Anyone thinking the fee market can be restrained to Bitcoin alone >> is mistaken. >> >> >> *From:* Vali Zero via bitcoin-dev >> *Sent:* Wednesday, >> July 29, 2015 7:09 AM *To:* >> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org >> *Subject:* >> [bitcoin-dev] Răspuns: Personal opinion on the fee market from a >> worried local trader >> >> I am disappointed that you did not understand my point of view. >> Let me rephrase it for you, >> >> People tipping, buying 0.99$ products and gamblers that need >> Bitcoin transactions *more* than the rest of the people will >> afford the fees that establish the equilibrium between demand and >> supply of Bitcoin transactions. The people are free to use they >> money for whatever they like, but you should understand that >> Bitcoin transactions are not free. >> >> I was merely attempting to point out that spammers and gamblers >> would be the first ones that would go away. They would be free to >> spam or gamble, but they would have to pay for it. >> >> When a category of users would get priced out because of the fee >> market, they would be free to use any altcoin they want. >> >> Please understand that not everyone will leave. The more >> important players will remain, those that need it the most. The >> other players are free to use whatever altcoin they wish. >> >> >> În Miercuri, 29 Iulie 2015 16:47:57, Angel Leon >> a scris: >> >> >> "the gamblers and perhaps people transacting very low amounts. >> The people that actually need Bitcoin would remain." >> >> so people tipping, buying $0.99 products, and gamblers actually >> don't need Bitcoin. Who are you to say what people need to use >> money for? This statement goes against the freedom of >> decentralization and financial freedom Bitcoin should be able to >> provide. >> >> It's an open network and it will be used as most users see fit, >> and that requires a blocksize increase wether you like it or not, >> it's simple physics, other time wait times will become unbearable >> for those not willing to pay the high fees, if people leave, then >> it only mean bitcoins isn't useful, and if bitcoin isn't useful, >> it's worthless. >> >> >> >> http://twitter.com/gubatron >> >> On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 9:27 AM, Vali Zero via bitcoin-dev >> > > wrote: >> >> Hello, >> >> I have been reading an argument saying that paying higher fees >> would scare Bitcoin users and they would stop using it, >> preferring bank transfers or other payment methods. This does not >> make sense for me. If some users leave, then demand for bitcoin >> transactions goes down and so do the fees. The others remain. >> >> Fee market means that an equilibrium is found between the demand >> for bitcoin transactions and the available supply (given by the >> block size). The fee is the price that finds this equilibrium. >> >> If a fee market starts to exist, the first ones to leave are the >> spammers, probably followed by the gamblers and perhaps people >> transacting very low amounts. The people that actually need >> Bitcoin would remain. >> >> Please allow this fee market to form... >> >> In the absence of a functioning fee market, I will refuse to run >> Bitcoin code that increases the block size and will do my best >> to tell everyone I know not to upgrade towards running such code. >> If Bitcoin succombs to the free stuff army, I will sell all the >> coins and leave. Nothing is for free. >> >> I apologize for any exagerations, but I just felt strongly >> towards expressing my opinion here. I'm only a local Bitcoin >> trader, computer engineer, with a reasonable understanding of >> free markets. And I'm running only one full node. >> >> Kind regards, Valentin >> >> >> _______________________________________________ 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 > - -- http://abis.io ~ "a protocol concept to enable decentralization and expansion of a giving economy, and a new social good" https://keybase.io/odinn -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVufPFAAoJEGxwq/inSG8CBHUIAKZQaTvJToxGmEXSTckHZ2fX NEVJNbw0oebdpQU6mvYR1hjK4LE/pY+cyfTh98RxQtsIHGJqVghU/kgzP6PSyS9J NYB3HO3iz2l9rBRQCe197wfg1GlY1QhepNFofYj1k1MDIB2QCMUXhUwz7e7wncuc TESDEHH/mUqPOnWBKeEbru7gr0aLn8ltmEHXwDQdlPP9iyXGpt9oGWoP1fBYTRwg r29vW8wCYhKzbS44ovPRilGWnWhxyB/2N5Qb94JkdzWCdr98bBIZQ8eL+w64lEhv 9A8Umiu9B8c6Ch9C1d4c/ircA4MJKSroTfLh8SgkjYtdAnECAJmQ3ZcUGgyGerw= =gCvd -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----