On Monday, 16 June 2014, at 7:59 pm, Mike Hearn wrote:
> >
> > This is a cool idea, but doesn't it generate some perverse incentives? If
> > I'm running a full node and I want to pay CheapAir for some plane tickets,
> > I'll want to pay in the greatest number of individual transactions possible
> Peers can calculate rewards based on number of inputs or total kb used:
> you're paying for kilobytes with either coin age or fees no matter what. So
> I think in practice it's not a big deal.

So effectively, if you pay for your bandwidth/storage usage via fees, then the 
reward system is constrained by proof of burn, and if you pay for your usage 
via coin age, then the reward system is constrained by proof of stake.

Now another concern: won't this proposal increase the likelihood of a network 
split? The free-market capitalist nodes will want to charge their peers and 
will kick and ban peers that don't pay up (and will pay their peers to avoid 
being kicked and banned themselves), whereas the socialist nodes will want all 
of their peers to feed them transactions out of the goodness of their hearts 
and will thus necessarily be relegated to connecting only to other altrustic 
peers. Thus, the network will comprise two incompatible ideological camps, 
whose nodes won't interconnect.

HPCC Systems Open Source Big Data Platform from LexisNexis Risk Solutions
Find What Matters Most in Your Big Data with HPCC Systems
Open Source. Fast. Scalable. Simple. Ideal for Dirty Data.
Leverages Graph Analysis for Fast Processing & Easy Data Exploration
Bitcoin-development mailing list

Reply via email to