There must be a way to organize “branches” of smaller activity to join main tree after they grow. Outsider a bit, I see going circles here, but not everything must be accepted in the chain. Good idea as it is, it’s just too early to record every sight….
> On Mar 30, 2017, at 5:52 PM, Jared Lee Richardson via bitcoin-dev > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Further, we are very far from the point (in my appraisal) where fees are > > high enough to block home users from using the network. > > This depends entirely on the usecase entirely. Most likely even without a > blocksize increase, home purchases will be large enough to fit on the > blocksize in the forseeable future. Microtransactions(<$0.25) on the other > hand aren't viable no matter what we try to do - There's just too much data. > > Most likely, transaction fees above $1 per tx will become unappealing for > many consumers, and above $10 is likely to be niche-level. It is hard to say > with any certainty, but average credit card fees give us some indications to > work with - $1.2 on a $30 transaction, though paid by the business and not > the consumer. > > Without blocksize increases, fees higher than $1/tx are basically inevitable, > most likely before 2020. Running a node only costs $10/month if that. If we > were going to favor node operational costs that highly in the weighting, we'd > better have a pretty solid justification with mathematical models or examples. > > > We should not throw away the core innovation of monetary sovereignty in > > pursuit of supporting 0.1% of the world's daily transactions. > > If we can easily have both, why not have both? > > An altcoin with both will take Bitcoin's monetary sovereignty crown by > default. No crown, no usecases, no Bitcoin. > >
_______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
