Return-Path: Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org (smtp2.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::133]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6E00C0037 for ; Tue, 16 Jan 2024 23:40:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C77D540189 for ; Tue, 16 Jan 2024 23:40:51 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp2.osuosl.org C77D540189 Authentication-Results: smtp2.osuosl.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20230601 header.b=eZvaVshi X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_SBL_A=0.1] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp2.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7rUSH6lD5dUg for ; Tue, 16 Jan 2024 23:40:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-il1-x136.google.com (mail-il1-x136.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::136]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 85DCC4011D for ; Tue, 16 Jan 2024 23:40:50 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp2.osuosl.org 85DCC4011D Received: by mail-il1-x136.google.com with SMTP id e9e14a558f8ab-3606de7f4bdso47259555ab.0 for ; Tue, 16 Jan 2024 15:40:50 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1705448449; x=1706053249; darn=lists.linuxfoundation.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=rGt5VO6npf6zi+diH7z9mt9gpDVXhQsWMp5caJrMIR8=; b=eZvaVshi54ZhAKRVxBvwTBYGu5XcSQqon7msJT19GNT2m/3gCGdmQD9rxTJE1ATosn R9rDhQufm6e3pJbDshk8whd5OrP51tdgpS/J9MNHn3E3nqFIVBSjq4PXaj3zfo3MVTZe 5rI2AwRiRS0equrXeIlG648CRhz9D036rKE0Zhw6q/ec6jq5SbH0uqGX1nJN8C9kiL2l Oqu3y2GS4o993VtUnBpatMQnQ5WgwSomgm8Q3DwnsDaq3S4ZiY8j5FutRekjlOWiTbS0 qdMRIITno6XvhO/gf0RJJ6dVxbW9XsS1ua8luDS0fSAdasHCtGtD1UDO+2WTJRUmRM1L Vv6Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1705448449; x=1706053249; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=rGt5VO6npf6zi+diH7z9mt9gpDVXhQsWMp5caJrMIR8=; b=Y9n+KnAe0ijV4QuSwuOgNFsGhDj+hX9r0e2uj1wqWQCk5FPaGZhcmaEgdHBihiwOhV rJNvX/QZKJWnqdhHEnOvX1xd92FO+NjvbeNSvG8AULSNpmfVpwFpKTbq1O+Ww/izcbkE ORkMvLqXNFCKK80M4R8QF+wNeRklc4DSVKeubPwI/oknUSxsWnwsvDwsDCcoHIo1Vd8C 9vdAxnKrEShQ2q2neZfTxBW4KbEGWGxriEa4UsJLqr1lTNjwGkST8m6MVpbMUgL1U1gL KDwhOiYwJ6DAKGgVtHdGH9cZj3iNyHM7O1vtFXLv5qbM32aQuQ3Oei8JP6r6bbTevK9X 3Z5g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwCzHw7gT4Kav0BHib8UqhuzYTkfWs5JVNM4IhUUPQQiR4IAtqH DEX0kg0bROgFZTO4wJg+jjm8OkTX2J+P1wMBrVmNRfWG X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFTsDZfISNVECupnu/JLvFvJG34jP/19jfW0sTeXccQbOGteuRthmW4mzCFy96YwykNlq2bPK2U5Jn1pXPPcfM= X-Received: by 2002:a92:c7cf:0:b0:361:8cb5:5a97 with SMTP id g15-20020a92c7cf000000b003618cb55a97mr1391286ilk.50.1705448449543; Tue, 16 Jan 2024 15:40:49 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Nagaev Boris Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2024 20:40:12 -0300 Message-ID: To: Greg Tonoski , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 17 Jan 2024 02:06:08 +0000 Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] [BUG]: Bitcoin blockspace price discrimination put simple transactions at disadvantage X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2024 23:40:52 -0000 On Sun, Jan 14, 2024 at 10:21=E2=80=AFAM Greg Tonoski via bitcoin-dev wrote: > > > Price of blockspace should be the same for any data (1 byte =3D 1 byt= e, > > irrespectively of location inside or outside of witness), e.g. 205/205 > > and 767/767 bytes in the examples above. > > > > "Should" ... to what end? > > "Should" in order to avoid hazard of centralization. A single bidder > who takes advantage of "buy 1 get 3 megabytes free" may outcompete a > number of individuals whose simple transactions recieve > anti-preferential treatment - "buy 1 get 0.33 megabytes free" in > aggregate. There is the illustration at: > "https://gregtonoski.github.io/bitcoin/segwit-mispricing/Comparison_of_4M= B_and_1.33MB_blocks_in_Bitcoin.pdf". It is not sufficient to be a centralized sender to utilize this advanage. The sender has to store data in the blockchain which itself is not the best utilization of money, even given the discount. Also what is the danger of centralization of such senders? The dangerous centralization is the centralization of real bitcoin sending, which has already happened - exchanges utilize batch transaction sending, saving on fees over a regular bitcoin sender, because they avoid change creation. This has nothing to do with witness discount, though. > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev --=20 Best regards, Boris Nagaev