1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
|
Return-Path: <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CD290481
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 30 Jul 2015 15:41:34 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-wi0-f169.google.com (mail-wi0-f169.google.com
[209.85.212.169])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 956661F3
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 30 Jul 2015 15:41:31 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by wicgb10 with SMTP id gb10so249544820wic.1
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 30 Jul 2015 08:41:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date
:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type
:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=MRlIORVkr1bHDQ/FXQbly645jlET5YX+64EybjgErUQ=;
b=L0/fOqTQsPWfTpu0jE7RXI+xiAnFwRTITN76sMs3kVnyj47fPWpwj0foJqzpt527o3
8wvNJaPua/Zdm0iCuU53foTL7cYFQYqqdtOrgmv3Ha/2jDwT7wmQJ35nKmHD+RChTIO/
l0HctcXhl5ReRg6ihcqR56JWiAJ2wAszXElQCnCUsKuxXDpbxedx1qpSKUDtVkrhd8Kk
q5kmA7gKS/5EnREvL02AaHXKTNVb+5yhaioJkcYwfrfcua7W7u0UTgChkySacPwuoNOo
wVZJhRXT8Z1A+F2Nx/R22WfnV4k4JvC9XoStzrhR7MtOJ7sKy0j0t3Zh+HFDRzg/+yIA
oACA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQk6pGsocUBgdE/q46EEbivTM/HhCLxHkv6WdGQnBovHo3y0sjpIV0WaC9j0FbmCx8IEKSt0
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.238.39 with SMTP id vh7mr16778671wjc.109.1438270890357;
Thu, 30 Jul 2015 08:41:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.95.168 with HTTP; Thu, 30 Jul 2015 08:41:30 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <2905605.OvbZMWuhGy@coldstorage>
References: <1B7F00D3-41AE-44BF-818D-EC4EF279DC11@gmail.com>
<55B9EB68.9020703@mail.bihthai.net>
<CABm2gDpJjimF486qca=JGQ0h6k9qzike-hjVUU2NhOuCzbBkow@mail.gmail.com>
<2905605.OvbZMWuhGy@coldstorage>
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 17:41:30 +0200
Message-ID: <CABm2gDrZvnzjs-02-E8BfTwqePWSxVAEdB+vFnByqYUNxw_W9w@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
To: Thomas Zander <thomas@thomaszander.se>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW
autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Why Satoshi's temporary anti-spam measure
isn'ttemporary
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Development 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: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 15:41:34 -0000
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 4:52 PM, Thomas Zander via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On Thursday 30. July 2015 11.38.00 Jorge Tim=C3=B3n via bitcoin-dev wrote=
:
>> It is important ro note that even if lightning was never developed, the
>> block size remains at 1 MB forever and fees rise to 10 usd per transacti=
on,
>> such "high fees" are still extremely competitive with non-decentralized
>> payment systems that have proportional fees.
>
>
> What makes you think that when there is such a low availability of transa=
ction
> space that paying to be included costs you $10, that Bitcoin is not going=
to
> be outcompeted and replaced or otherwise regarded as worthless?
I'm just saying that rational economic actors will prefer to pay 10
usd over 11 usd in fees.
My example was: 10 usd flat fee vs 1% fee (both numbers pulled out of a hat=
).
Well, 10 usd fees is cheaper than 1% fees for any transacted amount
greater than 1000 usd.
Take into account that this is just an extreme example to make my
point: hopefully fees will never rise to a value as high as 10 usd.
|
