MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <D50AEC8C-4EEC-4C17-8626-87C651F1AA66@voskuil.org>
 <6xuj-ljJ9hvME-TIgWHmfPpad4aJ-1zTYSH1NBuFL_gi-6hJHMayWLEAhcEyw_lqmkR24ee8uMIAH6n4TDguk_5fJ8och99Em3m5y1R6brE=@protonmail.com>
 <YssL6VL9y6EwyBjr@petertodd.org> <08a53f48e81f1da06bd688e524ae4ec7@dtrt.org>
 <CAJowKgJb99LAQ=KGEcU2a1jJBPGBNh7=zW177NpS-vxvKZyO0A@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAJowKgJb99LAQ=KGEcU2a1jJBPGBNh7=zW177NpS-vxvKZyO0A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Erik Aronesty <erik@q32.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2022 11:04:39 -0400
Message-ID: <CAJowKgKCUZwMLMhmp8tdZLZRKDjmjkdfWey+pkSm5-tw66ZFYg@mail.gmail.com>
To: "David A. Harding" <dave@dtrt.org>, 
 Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000097e8a05e4a28049"
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Surprisingly, Tail Emission Is Not Inflationary
Precedence: list

--000000000000097e8a05e4a28049
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

even with zero block reward and minimal fees, large holders who perform
zero transactions will still mine in order to preserve the value of the
network

this is not "mining your own tx", it is unrelated

this is "mining at a small loss to preserve your stake"

not only don't we need issuance or fees, but also the censorship resistance
is not meaningfully improved with issuance


On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 3:14 PM Erik Aronesty <erik@q32.com> wrote:

>
>> subsidy to directly tie miner revenue to the total value of Bitcoin
>> makes it not exactly how we want to incentivise a service that keeps
>>
>>
> again, this is meaningless.   if the fees aren't enough to keep  bitcoin
> secure for large transactions, then large holders are incentivised to mine
>
> that's it.
>
> it's not complicated
>

--000000000000097e8a05e4a28049
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div>even with zero block reward and minimal fees, large h=
olders who perform zero transactions will still mine in order to preserve t=
he value of the network</div><div><br></div><div>this is not &quot;mining y=
our own tx&quot;, it is unrelated</div><div><br></div><div>this is &quot;mi=
ning at a small loss to preserve your stake&quot;</div><div><br></div><div>=
not only don&#39;t we need issuance or fees, but also the censorship resist=
ance is not meaningfully improved with issuance=C2=A0</div><div><br></div><=
/div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">O=
n Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 3:14 PM Erik Aronesty &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:erik@q32=
.com">erik@q32.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote=
" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);=
padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquote c=
lass=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px soli=
d rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><br>subsidy to directly tie miner reve=
nue to the total value of Bitcoin <br>
makes it not exactly how we want to incentivise a service that keeps <br><b=
r></blockquote><div><br></div><div>again, this is meaningless.=C2=A0 =C2=A0=
if the fees aren&#39;t enough=C2=A0to keep=C2=A0 bitcoin secure for large t=
ransactions, then large holders are incentivised to mine</div><div><br></di=
v><div>that&#39;s it.</div><div><br></div><div>it&#39;s not complicated</di=
v></div></div>
</blockquote></div>

--000000000000097e8a05e4a28049--