Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.216.174 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.216.174; envelope-from=gmaxwell@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-qc0-f174.google.com; 
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1339786247.64852.YahooMailNeo@web121006.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
References: <CANEZrP3w+AiTXmv9Wb3Zi5yyFmGPk82-ysVo4_DVvtg8HHBCdQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FDB6946.2020400@justmoon.de>
	<CAErK2CgODFY7HMC-WZRAmts-6eOE074Tz4nX5Nr6EvB8o-QWJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<1339785500.74108.YahooMailNeo@web121006.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
	<CAAS2fgSVbYFkkhP_0Ny5ULB-DJKN-3hZLkqWukrGL80-UenMwQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<1339786247.64852.YahooMailNeo@web121006.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 14:55:52 -0400
Message-ID: <CAAS2fgQEFgLOEkSSTpn5OFuwa+AYA3LajTD-MqJ83rEPCW4u-Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
To: Amir Taaki <zgenjix@yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: "bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net"
	<bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Near-term scalability
Precedence: list

On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 2:50 PM, Amir Taaki <zgenjix@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Part of the problem is that Satoshi didn't totally anticipate the growth =
of the network. The block reward (the subsidy) is too high, which is why tr=
ansactions can afford to be so cheap. What would happen if blocks required =
a cumulative fee of XN BTC for N transactions before being accepted?

I would take the last block I solved and use it to write a transaction
to nowhere which which gave all 50 BTC out in fee.  This pays for as
many transactions in the block as I like for any value of X you want
to choose.

You should read the bitcointalk forums more often: variants on that
idea are frequently suggested and dismantled. There is a lot of noise
there but also a lot of ideas and knowing what doesn't work is good
too.