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
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
|
Return-Path: <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org (smtp1.osuosl.org [140.211.166.138])
by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0443C002D
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 12 Dec 2022 02:27:40 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87343813E5
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 12 Dec 2022 02:27:40 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp1.osuosl.org 87343813E5
Authentication-Results: smtp1.osuosl.org;
dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=protonmail.com header.i=@protonmail.com
header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=protonmail3 header.b=rlT4GRYa
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.602
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.602 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001,
FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL=0.5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001,
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 CH3QMAb6uuk7
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 12 Dec 2022 02:27:40 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp1.osuosl.org C4AED813E0
Received: from mail-40137.protonmail.ch (mail-40137.protonmail.ch
[185.70.40.137])
by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C4AED813E0
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 12 Dec 2022 02:27:39 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2022 02:27:31 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com;
s=protonmail3; t=1670812057; x=1671071257;
bh=4wHbEYZdY0w2JjRFmjAbaHOfw2t0DbcZ0qlINi0Z7uU=;
h=Date:To:From:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:
Feedback-ID:From:To:Cc:Date:Subject:Reply-To:Feedback-ID:
Message-ID:BIMI-Selector;
b=rlT4GRYaasXIFYoAdUI6ajgmP1PnYqFakVhWu6oyZoQaJVZwFOcBluJMp5XXabzZl
ZiL5j+D2XXmsVY9jeq+0Y4A1OKEV5vrPQsWC5qh0OuLzE01hnMIRzcPsECAIFTIyRU
NV4GcYIxu2k59EOI2k+xEpx/xYrsJhVF4EpPpSvJYG4dwtCpZVgZI3qemFork0vUs7
8grJB4v3Gw0nQf9AFbZcZP2Ewjw6P41DacbzJT2oxjWLl+JUFCMsQf5zMp9bd68dIk
ZII+AEChHKrt55XlWg5XjJ0bDMMfffV9wRTJVHigwOej99cgybUi4TqgpPIYZ277Na
x+ZdlXlr+PHNQ==
To: John Carvalho <john@synonym.to>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
From: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
Message-ID: <mbdvMAocVkRVOHgwFJQ6z9c0IY1GxfhPKrIhd4yFYsYed_-m_0AzoELUhbBNEN1HByblCPmZmWyQ5Ow5TtGIY036az6gbfYUnyPtO_SkI18=@protonmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHTn92wri-edhivrtqZCoEzAPEmwZFap12mM4yzxgp77O-+JYA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <mailman.48662.1670246787.956.bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
<CAHTn92wri-edhivrtqZCoEzAPEmwZFap12mM4yzxgp77O-+JYA@mail.gmail.com>
Feedback-ID: 2872618:user:proton
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] [Opt-in full-RBF] Zero-conf apps in immediate
danger (angus)
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: Mon, 12 Dec 2022 02:27:40 -0000
Good morning John, et al,
> > As has been pointed out by may others before, full RBF is aligned with =
miner (and user) economic incentives
>=20
>=20
> This is a theory, not a fact. I can refute this theory by pointing out se=
veral aspects:
> 1. RBF is actually a fee-minimization feature that allows users to game t=
he system to spend the *least* amount in fees that correlates to their time=
-preference. Miners earn less when fees can be minimized (obviously). This =
feature also comes at an expense (albeit small) to nodes providing replacem=
ent service and propagation.
It is helpful to remember that the fees are a price on confirmation.
And in economics, there is a "price theory":
* As price goes down, demand goes up.
* As price goes up, net-earning-per-unit goes up.
The combination of both forces causes a curve where *total* earnings vs pri=
ce has a peak somewhere, an "optimum price", and that peak is *unlikely* to=
be at the maximum possible price you might deem reasonable.
And this optimum price may very well be *lower* than the prevailing market =
price of a good.
Thus, saying "RBF is actually a fee-minimization feature" neglects the econ=
omics of the situation.
If more people could use RBF onchain, more people would use Bitcoin and inc=
rease the value to miners.
Rather than a fee-minimization feature, RBF is really an optimization to *s=
peed up* the discovery of the optimum price, and is thus desirable.
Unfortunately many 0-conf acceptors outright reject opt-in-RBF, despite the=
improved discovery of the optimum price, and thus there is a need for full=
-RBF to improve price discovery of blockspace when such acceptors are too p=
revalent.
Regards,
ZmnSCPxj
|
