summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/13/acd5815c1a1b6c631505b680d5194ab9afab02
blob: 8d44db44cdd95ed5c250f054ccf83c89393d983c (plain)
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
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
Return-Path: <odinn.cyberguerrilla@riseup.net>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
	[172.17.192.35])
	by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 12DFA268
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Thu, 30 Jul 2015 09:52:15 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mx1.riseup.net (mx1.riseup.net [198.252.153.129])
	by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 420FDEA
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Thu, 30 Jul 2015 09:52:14 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from piha.riseup.net (unknown [10.0.1.162])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(Client CN "*.riseup.net",
	Issuer "COMODO RSA Domain Validation Secure Server CA" (verified OK))
	by mx1.riseup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D0D3840FAD;
	Thu, 30 Jul 2015 09:52:13 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=riseup.net; s=squak;
	t=1438249933; bh=XYY67JGo43e3P9rC99zwJoQQijkXi11j7hxC2+l22Wk=;
	h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From;
	b=Isk7doD/O0zWPFoc/fEhxiF741WNHveNqaEQJlTpdfMbXV3vWH0RKu+josxqcT+Xg
	pD4i6qHPw7pMrrUuWaROaqURiJtF4sE93oE38BSKJ6a9mXaS21fZVGJYMBn6zQJaAM
	eY+21a2Hda+b+cqCy99fN8cCzZZ2fNJkSUQP1Oi4=
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	(Authenticated sender: odinn.cyberguerrilla)
	with ESMTPSA id AD370141C99
Message-ID: <55B9F3C5.7060302@riseup.net>
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 02:52:05 -0700
From: odinn <odinn.cyberguerrilla@riseup.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
	rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: s7r@sky-ip.org, "Raystonn ." <raystonn@hotmail.com>, 
	Vali Zero <valizero@yahoo.ro>, bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
References: <CADZB0_ZgDMhVgCUh2PTAPDL7k_W8QGt_HLYdkwv_qQ5xEMn8HA@mail.gmail.com>	<543015348.4948849.1438178962054.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>	<COL131-DS3F7339BCCA36BEFD1755ACD8C0@phx.gbl>
	<55B959A2.9020402@sky-ip.org>
In-Reply-To: <55B959A2.9020402@sky-ip.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.98.7 at mx1
X-Virus-Status: Clean
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
	DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FIN_FREE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,
	UNPARSEABLE_RELAY autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
	smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev]
 =?utf-8?q?R=C4=83spuns=3A_Personal_opinion_on_the_f?=
 =?utf-8?q?ee_market_from_a_worried_local_trader?=
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Development 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: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 09:52:15 -0000

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Some additional points....

On 07/29/2015 03:54 PM, s7r via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> (...)
> 
> The more people use bitcoin, the more demand we have on the market
> for BTC, the higher BTC/FIAT rate will be, more people will become 
> interested in mining and so on. Bitcoin is not a
> rich-only-private-club, it's an open, global, decentralized payment
> network. The less people use it... I guess you figured it out.

Yes.

(...) Having some
> offchain solution for small transactions would be a good idea, but
> this doesn't mean we should make small transactions impossible due
> to absurd fees.

This is correct also.

> 
> On 7/29/2015 8:47 PM, Raystonn . via bitcoin-dev wrote:
>>> When a category of users would get priced out because of the
>>> fee
>> market, they would be free to use any altcoin they want.
>> 
>> I believe that pretty well sums up where we’re headed if
>> transaction rate is artificially limited, whether that be by
>> maximum block size limit or something else.  A fee market will
>> necessarily include more than just Bitcoin.  The reality is it’s
>> very easy to trade value across different blockchains, and thus a
>> fee market will bleed value from Bitcoin and give it to
>> alternative blockchains.  If Bitcoin’s blocks are at maximum
>> capacity, people will exchange for something that allows them to
>> transact with a lesser fee, then make the desired payment.  This
>> adds value to the alternative blockchain and removes it from
>> Bitcoin.
>> 
>> Anyone thinking the fee market can be restrained to Bitcoin alone
>> is mistaken.
>> 
>> 
>> *From:* Vali Zero via bitcoin-dev 
>> <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> *Sent:* Wednesday,
>> July 29, 2015 7:09 AM *To:*
>> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org 
>> <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> *Subject:*
>> [bitcoin-dev] Răspuns: Personal opinion on the fee market from a
>> worried local trader
>> 
>> I am disappointed that you did not understand my point of view.
>> Let me rephrase it for you,
>> 
>> People tipping, buying 0.99$ products and gamblers that need
>> Bitcoin transactions *more* than the rest of the people will
>> afford the fees that establish the equilibrium between demand and
>> supply of Bitcoin transactions. The people are free to use they
>> money for whatever they like, but you should understand that
>> Bitcoin transactions are not free.
>> 
>> I was merely attempting to point out that spammers and gamblers
>> would be the first ones that would go away. They would be free to
>> spam or gamble, but they would have to pay for it.
>> 
>> When a category of users would get priced out because of the fee
>> market, they would be free to use any altcoin they want.
>> 
>> Please understand that not everyone will leave. The more
>> important players will remain, those that need it the most. The
>> other players are free to use whatever altcoin they wish.
>> 
>> 
>> În Miercuri, 29 Iulie 2015 16:47:57, Angel Leon
>> <gubatron@gmail.com> a scris:
>> 
>> 
>> "the gamblers and perhaps people transacting very low amounts.
>> The people that actually need Bitcoin would remain."
>> 
>> so people tipping, buying $0.99 products, and gamblers actually
>> don't need Bitcoin. Who are you to say what people need to use
>> money for? This statement goes against the freedom of
>> decentralization and financial freedom Bitcoin should be able to
>> provide.
>> 
>> It's an open network and it will be used as most users see fit,
>> and that requires a blocksize increase wether you like it or not,
>> it's simple physics, other time wait times will become unbearable
>> for those not willing to pay the high fees, if people leave, then
>> it only mean bitcoins isn't useful, and if bitcoin isn't useful,
>> it's worthless.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> http://twitter.com/gubatron
>> 
>> On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 9:27 AM, Vali Zero via bitcoin-dev 
>> <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org 
>> <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>> wrote:
>> 
>> Hello,
>> 
>> I have been reading an argument saying that paying higher fees
>> would scare Bitcoin users and they would stop using it,
>> preferring bank transfers or other payment methods. This does not
>> make sense for me. If some users leave, then demand for bitcoin
>> transactions goes down and so do the fees. The others remain.
>> 
>> Fee market means that an equilibrium is found between the demand
>> for bitcoin transactions and the available supply (given by the
>> block size). The fee is the price that finds this equilibrium.
>> 
>> If a fee market starts to exist, the first ones to leave are the 
>> spammers, probably followed by the gamblers and perhaps people 
>> transacting very low amounts. The people that actually need
>> Bitcoin would remain.
>> 
>> Please allow this fee market to form...
>> 
>> In the absence of a functioning fee market, I will refuse to run 
>> Bitcoin code that increases the block size and will do my best
>> to tell everyone I know not to upgrade towards running such code.
>> If Bitcoin succombs to the free stuff army, I will sell all the
>> coins and leave. Nothing is for free.
>> 
>> I apologize for any exagerations, but I just felt strongly
>> towards expressing my opinion here. I'm only a local Bitcoin
>> trader, computer engineer, with a reasonable understanding of
>> free markets. And I'm running only one full node.
>> 
>> Kind regards, Valentin
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev
>> mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org 
>> <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> 
>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>> 
>> 
> _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing
> list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org 
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
> 

- -- 
http://abis.io ~
"a protocol concept to enable decentralization
and expansion of a giving economy, and a new social good"
https://keybase.io/odinn
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVufPFAAoJEGxwq/inSG8CBHUIAKZQaTvJToxGmEXSTckHZ2fX
NEVJNbw0oebdpQU6mvYR1hjK4LE/pY+cyfTh98RxQtsIHGJqVghU/kgzP6PSyS9J
NYB3HO3iz2l9rBRQCe197wfg1GlY1QhepNFofYj1k1MDIB2QCMUXhUwz7e7wncuc
TESDEHH/mUqPOnWBKeEbru7gr0aLn8ltmEHXwDQdlPP9iyXGpt9oGWoP1fBYTRwg
r29vW8wCYhKzbS44ovPRilGWnWhxyB/2N5Qb94JkdzWCdr98bBIZQ8eL+w64lEhv
9A8Umiu9B8c6Ch9C1d4c/ircA4MJKSroTfLh8SgkjYtdAnECAJmQ3ZcUGgyGerw=
=gCvd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----