path: root/28/a06d3741264ee7066c797fa285bc0d512a4325

Return-Path: <user@petertodd.org>
Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org (smtp1.osuosl.org [140.211.166.138])
 by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 799F8C002D
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Sun,  3 Jul 2022 09:44:05 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22E3782F84
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Sun,  3 Jul 2022 09:44:05 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp1.osuosl.org 22E3782F84
Authentication-Results: smtp1.osuosl.org;
 dkim=pass (2048-bit key, unprotected) header.d=petertodd.org
 header.i=@petertodd.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm3 header.b=if7k6i+5; 
 dkim=pass (2048-bit key,
 unprotected) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com
 header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm2 header.b=cG5wLMDI
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.802
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.802 tagged_above=-999 required=5
 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
 DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7,
 SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001]
 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
 by localhost (smtp1.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
 with ESMTP id ji57wEAQZlEJ
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Sun,  3 Jul 2022 09:44:04 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp1.osuosl.org B0DF182F80
Received: from wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com
 [64.147.123.24])
 by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B0DF182F80
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Sun,  3 Jul 2022 09:44:03 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.46])
 by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAA1B32002F9;
 Sun,  3 Jul 2022 05:43:57 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162])
 by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 03 Jul 2022 05:43:58 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=petertodd.org;
 h=cc:cc:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to
 :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:sender
 :subject:subject:to:to; s=fm3; t=1656841437; x=1656927837; bh=Rm
 l3TYTawSRie0Hhyg/Vmy6d0/lLo1WoRyVSq7d9Mag=; b=if7k6i+5MMMjoawY5x
 W2iVpOjfGYzLfJGJBlWZEZu6qRrKMckkvGLNfbi7MDgzZfFiRNaSvgVxt3Drn1Kq
 /8DKXDAKIPUxE8R/TvcSQIgGW2Tf0QRyDIpRUHcvVCo68dHETlJJqiShtvmpzD/3
 71qcE2VDScJnG7tQNMchIe1Ob79811MUywhVabdR4qI+VTOCKXL7t67Ml3/FfsBD
 vFRyQU9cxpFsO28wVO9uPtZbOs9gpOtD4Bip5eB23AVJlKGgfLQxjhJxTCY7DY/I
 FmhCYdA51AkvalS4AmqirmbfUXpW1jZYeb5xUCDsHLkGAvslw43wszgehVdugKtC
 8wCg==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=
 messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:date:date:feedback-id
 :feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id
 :mime-version:references:reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to
 :x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=
 fm2; t=1656841437; x=1656927837; bh=Rml3TYTawSRie0Hhyg/Vmy6d0/lL
 o1WoRyVSq7d9Mag=; b=cG5wLMDInwxkbMi70t4hOw/lKSOwysuiymh/jqVHFnJY
 J1csnSFIN+bKSsNzO7kJ/p7YFKm0af671V/cA/Cm+FXAg3cayNp82htOMMfD11bq
 B2IKHU7MW3rogCwpoHxm6oPcIW87rz/nnQT3KqigHnWi12x05I3Zcb4tFnTG4TbY
 mjdWogw+7w8qB2X+tPTeISKhgNCNtyfKL4pddmdxmYZl+/nVOL7ioZOLQwrDtAXr
 4WOqaqp3kzsemDdQCdgp7llzX66fB8MbxqQAg/Yt+cJI0nBsHbLzbnZ0uLetCAZ6
 QaZ7RtFMqL6tO1pUL5waULfnXOI9L+TClCJ+okWplA==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:3WTBYvrqqKOldEkJ3LmxEY_SrWEzMKkNLc7yt9t02wHW3D5_nG6m4w>
 <xme:3WTBYprEdiSzQCppx7ic2T5VollsWkhel2Ai41JJyxPRZ9lIm39wTSLx6gMNPOKf8
 IwXg9po-N0NYwhidwQ>
X-ME-Received: <xmr:3WTBYsNpjPw-vqVa3_83hAF3VpNh7rGSiUb-MgNiz2GkIA_PMIvhU0lR46Ly>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvfedrudehjedgvdduucetufdoteggodetrfdotf
 fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen
 uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne
 cujfgurhepfffhvfevuffkfhggtggujgesghdtreertddtvdenucfhrhhomheprfgvthgv
 rhcuvfhougguuceophgvthgvsehpvghtvghrthhouggurdhorhhgqeenucggtffrrghtth
 gvrhhnpeelvdellefftddukeduffejgfefjeeuheeileeftdfgteduteeggeevueethfej
 tdenucffohhmrghinhepphgvthgvrhhtohguugdrohhrghenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiii
 gvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehushgvrhesphgvthgvrhhtohguugdr
 ohhrgh
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:3WTBYi6mdY04_P8MN-epHYRijwv1RehMzCEvRVbhPIuASs-2fzFxJw>
 <xmx:3WTBYu7ZEEE7H0LeUmMxBuEdafs506HduHWZCAqpXULUL9teMFWGpA>
 <xmx:3WTBYqg6R6TaA6j1-z5JIEKCxvhvukl2dv_hTrAFG2ALWaHI8Q9XiA>
 <xmx:3WTBYkQJXgDM27irn3O2RN-CnoAKX4Ii49Gijctf0oXiz5XFNZaL5A>
Feedback-ID: i525146e8:Fastmail
Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Sun,
 3 Jul 2022 05:43:56 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by localhost (Postfix, from userid 1000)
 id 9ADE05F83D; Sun,  3 Jul 2022 05:43:53 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2022 05:43:53 -0400
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: Kate Salazar <mercedes.catherine.salazar@gmail.com>,
 Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Message-ID: <YsFk2S/1AWG2Jy/9@petertodd.org>
References: <CAJowKgJ8GP4Ykzn5dMHZ7wsE04YmpOLgTpdc9tgfVng0qB0Jjg@mail.gmail.com>
 <YqVfTU0M7XN8+Ybu@petertodd.org>
 <Pwr9EFLSv2rU7nXRzqFuw2LPxpFo22g_qYy4reQzpMuSlgRzTG536uLjZCc9sI43olReGMA7BFgjnxJGKtZNtxU7qRy_-YYOnz6TeMy4h8Q=@protonmail.com>
 <Yq77CnxOhr615ip8@petertodd.org>
 <CAAxiura7-TTUOg=vuH8q+orX+LVED74f+NvaYqVve3j--CjTMQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJowKgL=nVwnUrpSKmnsTxOfk3DEEZL7awG=HypyCXSR3XCLxg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALeFGL0CQC4_swZTt-=sbe=ZiCmRthZghGDtrWFx5bQCBeOJcg@mail.gmail.com>
 <YrS8URqD/BW4UrP0@petertodd.org>
 <CAGpPWDb=dF4-D5GKb2NoEcdW6TokNQyrwpGVwHJk+0HL43+J1Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHiDt8A+uQpY7jJ56hnk929yzwLw-DOT721cj1aUpGVzwmz2NQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
 protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="ve+aes3NTOz6RPy9"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAHiDt8A+uQpY7jJ56hnk929yzwLw-DOT721cj1aUpGVzwmz2NQ@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: Billy Tetrud <billy.tetrud@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin covenants are inevitable
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>, 
 <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>, 
 <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 03 Jul 2022 09:44:05 -0000


--ve+aes3NTOz6RPy9
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 12:44:11PM +0200, Kate Salazar via bitcoin-dev wrot=
e:
> > 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 c=
ould
> > 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 wh=
ich
> > should also be considered. The idea of decaying utxo value is interesti=
ng
> > to consider, but it would not solve the economic distortion that
> > monetary inflation causes, because that distortion is a result of monet=
ary
> > devaluation (which decaying utxos would be a form of). Then again, mayb=
e 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 cost=
s to
> > include holders. Tho, if I were to go back in time and influence how
> > bitcoin was designed, I might advocate for it.
> >
>=20
> 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 seri=
ous
problem with pool centralization.

What you would actually expect in a healthy Bitcoin ecosystem is for some p=
ool
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.

--=20
https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org

--ve+aes3NTOz6RPy9
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=OYQ0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--ve+aes3NTOz6RPy9--