MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <RyYBRY3MJP_0b2YkCEUFBdP8u1A_cGSEEkDbzKK9k-rkINZrBaOL70L96iHR11bJhmkhAzuN6uZ1X8PQgz2wa8Us3-2OpNa4RbhSSprw_WE=@protonmail.com>
 <CALeFGL1=4PrA_ziTsoS9sUjGjfLr54AiMfM99uDV-Bau5Ab_eQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJ4-pEADrHf_YR5ZBfJW+eefKrp1iEj4wAi72UrwRSi9gaVP+w@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAJ4-pEADrHf_YR5ZBfJW+eefKrp1iEj4wAi72UrwRSi9gaVP+w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Corey Haddad <corey3@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2022 11:40:19 -0400
Message-ID: <CAK_HAC8UrPSDoYU-b4KrZqGF3ndWqobPu2y_ddmCvTqNsbifBw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Zac Greenwood <zachgrw@gmail.com>, 
 Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000dc46f205dd400b3b"
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] User Resisted Soft Fork for CTV
Precedence: list

--000000000000dc46f205dd400b3b
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

>*A change that increases the number of use cases of Bitcoin affects all
users and is *not* non-invasive. More use cases means more blockchain usage
which increases the price of a transaction for *everyone*.*

This manages to be both incorrect and philosophically opposed to what
defines success of the project . Neither the number of ways that people
figure out how to innovatively harness Bitcoin's existing capabilities, nor
the number or complexity of any optional transaction types that the Bitcoin
protocol supports have any bearing on transaction fees. Demand for
blockspace from transactions, which is just plain *use* - and not *use
cases* - is what could drive up transaction fees.

On the philosophical level, as designers of the system, we all hope and
work to make Bitcoin so useful, appealing, and secure that there is massive
demand for blockspace, even in the face of high transaction fees. As an
individual thinking only of their next on-chain transaction, it is
understandable that one might hope for low fees and partially-filled
blocks. Longer term, the health of the system can both be measured by and
itself depends on high transaction demand and fee pressure.

If you were trying to argue that CTV is invasive because it may increase
transaction demand and therefore cost users more fees, that is 1) an
endorsement of CTV's desirability and 2) reveals that you consider any
increased free-market competition (i.e. more demand) to be "invasive".


*>I like the maxim of Peter Todd: any change of Bitcoin must benefit *all*
users. *

As for Peter Todd's "any change of Bitcoin must benefit *all* users", that
is absolutely a reasonable thing to consider. However, in order to make
practical use of that maxim, we must adopt in our minds a *generic*, or
"model user", and then replicate them so that we may meaningfully
understand a least a proxy for "all users". In reality, there will always
be someone (and at this point, probably a "user" too)  who wouldn't benefit
from a change, or at least think they won't. Some users of Bitcoin may even
want Bitcoin to fail, so we cannot afford assume that people have alignment
of goals or vision just by virtue of being a 'user'.

Corey


> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>

--000000000000dc46f205dd400b3b
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr">&gt;<i>A change that increases the number=
 of use cases of Bitcoin affects all users and is *not* non-invasive. More =
use cases means more blockchain usage which increases the price of a transa=
ction for *everyone*.</i><br></div><div><br></div><div>This manages to be b=
oth incorrect and philosophically opposed to what defines success of the pr=
oject . Neither the number of ways that people figure out how to innovative=
ly harness Bitcoin&#39;s existing capabilities, nor the number or complexit=
y of any optional=C2=A0transaction types that the Bitcoin protocol supports=
 have any bearing on transaction fees. Demand for blockspace from transacti=
ons, which is just plain=C2=A0<i>use</i>=C2=A0- and not <i>use cases</i>=C2=
=A0- is what could drive up transaction fees.</div><div><br></div><div>On t=
he philosophical=C2=A0level, as designers of the system, we all hope and wo=
rk to make Bitcoin so useful, appealing, and secure that there is massive d=
emand for blockspace, even in the face of high transaction fees. As an indi=
vidual thinking only of their next on-chain transaction, it is understandab=
le that one might hope for low fees and partially-filled blocks. Longer ter=
m, the health of the system can both be measured by and itself depends on h=
igh transaction demand and fee pressure.</div><div><br></div><div>If you we=
re trying to argue that CTV is invasive because it may increase transaction=
 demand and therefore cost users more fees, that is 1) an endorsement of CT=
V&#39;s desirability and 2) reveals that you consider any increased free-ma=
rket competition (i.e. more demand) to be &quot;invasive&quot;.</div><div><=
br></div><div><i>&gt;I like the maxim of Peter Todd: any change of Bitcoin =
must benefit *all* users.<span class=3D"gmail-Apple-converted-space">=C2=A0=
</span><br></i></div><div><i><span class=3D"gmail-Apple-converted-space"><b=
r></span></i></div><div>As for Peter Todd&#39;s &quot;any change of Bitcoin=
 must benefit *all* users&quot;, that is absolutely a reasonable thing to c=
onsider. However, in order to make practical use of that maxim, we must ado=
pt in our minds a <i>generic</i>, or &quot;model user&quot;, and then repli=
cate them so that we may meaningfully understand a least a proxy for &quot;=
all users&quot;. In reality, there will always be someone (and at this poin=
t, probably a &quot;user&quot; too) =C2=A0who wouldn&#39;t benefit from a c=
hange, or at least think they won&#39;t. Some users of Bitcoin may even wan=
t Bitcoin to fail, so we cannot afford assume that people have alignment of=
 goals or vision just by virtue of being a &#39;user&#39;.</div><div><br></=
div><div>Corey</div><div>=C2=A0<br></div><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blockq=
uote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-wi=
dth:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-=
left:1ex">_______________________________________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">=
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mail=
man/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br>
</blockquote></div></div>

--000000000000dc46f205dd400b3b--