Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of petertodd.org
	designates 62.13.148.93 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=62.13.148.93; envelope-from=pete@petertodd.org;
	helo=outmail148093.authsmtp.net; 
Date: Thu, 7 May 2015 13:42:20 -0400
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20150507174220.GC6033@savin.petertodd.org>
References: <554A91BE.6060105@bluematt.me>
	<CANEZrP3wGWHdz+ut6pvke5TJJsc1rTFt8sn2KziX35oL5LAsyg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABm2gDpDvk2VsQ+mJ-BoeBKmvu9jBXNujZEFKuCStRNjFL6VOA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CANEZrP2zAGCCBhNa4=9yw+A_Dn5o4SQXoPTE_qcJzZ1dFuF2tw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABm2gDqd6iHRUDKZWWTudcC1QkYa+rCuHjz7pMC2K1Db8wpgfA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CANEZrP1CU0kB0vXeXUX1L8byaT-Zf2xg+3N+GeNthi_i6bn1qw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABm2gDpgBNjuPLnFiU2TspgLws7JjWnsxih09JG9bQycraS=sQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CANEZrP1ay64jryeUyDJ9Y+1C-Bre1U_1xMyuB4cqQprd1-qbCA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABm2gDq12a8p8+fB14nM5S8CVz=sdESMowZJUeKBwvx16WDSDQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABsx9T1nwastEoN12B2Y-TA2V1fYtDcm9-nkiOQNVhXmbCjcGQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="L6iaP+gRLNZHKoI4"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CABsx9T1nwastEoN12B2Y-TA2V1fYtDcm9-nkiOQNVhXmbCjcGQ@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Block Size Increase
Precedence: list


--L6iaP+gRLNZHKoI4
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 12:59:13PM -0400, Gavin Andresen wrote:
> Fee dynamics seems to come up over and over again in these discussions,
> with lots of talk and theorizing.
>=20
> I hope some data on what is happening with fees right now might help, so I
> wrote another blog post (with graphs, which can't be done in a mailing li=
st
> post):
>    http://gavinandresen.ninja/the-myth-of-not-full-blocks
>=20
> We don=E2=80=99t need 100% full one megabyte blocks to start to learn abo=
ut what is
> likely to happen as transaction volume rises and/or the one megabyte block
> size limit is raised.

Sounds like you're saying we are bumping up against a 1MB limit. However
other than the occasional user who has sent a transaction with an
extremely low/no fee, what evidence do we have that this is or is not
actually impacting meaningful usage form the user's point of view?

Do we have evidence as to how users are coping? e.g. do they send time
sensitive transactiosn with higher fees? Are people conciously moving
low value transactions off the blockchain? Equally, what about the story
with companies? You of course are an advisor to Coinbase, and could give
us some insight into the type of planning payment processors/wallets are
doing.  For instance, does Coinbase have any plans to work with other
wallet providers/payment processors to aggregate fund transfers between
wallet providers - an obvious payment channel application.

--=20
'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
00000000000000000232164c96eaa6bf7cbc3dc61ea055840715b5a81ee8f6be

--L6iaP+gRLNZHKoI4
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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==
=RS/j
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--L6iaP+gRLNZHKoI4--