Security problems with relying on transaction fees for security [combined summary]

• Security problems with relying on transaction fees for security vjudeu at gazeta.pl 2022-07-15 06:03:57+00:00
• Security problems with relying on transaction fees for security Manuel Costa 2022-07-14 16:27:55+00:00
• Security problems with relying on transaction fees for security Erik Aronesty 2022-07-14 16:01:39+00:00
• Security problems with relying on transaction fees for security Gino Pinuto 2022-07-14 11:42:56+00:00
• Security problems with relying on transaction fees for security Erik Aronesty 2022-07-14 09:57:41+00:00
• Security problems with relying on transaction fees for security vjudeu at gazeta.pl 2022-07-14 09:33:13+00:00
• Security problems with relying on transaction fees for security Anthony Towns 2022-07-14 00:54:48+00:00
• Security problems with relying on transaction fees for security Manuel Costa 2022-07-13 13:29:43+00:00
• Security problems with relying on transaction fees for security Erik Aronesty 2022-07-13 12:18:43+00:00
• Security problems with relying on transaction fees for security Gino Pinuto 2022-07-13 12:11:59+00:00
• Security problems with relying on transaction fees for security John Tromp 2022-07-13 11:56:33+00:00
• Security problems with relying on transaction fees for security John Tromp 2022-07-13 09:43:57+00:00
• Security problems with relying on transaction fees for security Tom Harding 2022-07-13 00:38:32+00:00
• Security problems with relying on transaction fees for security Ryan Grant 2022-07-12 17:46:43+00:00
• Security problems with relying on transaction fees for security Peter 2022-07-12 15:08:41+00:00
• Security problems with relying on transaction fees for security Erik Aronesty 2022-07-12 11:57:40+00:00
• Security problems with relying on transaction fees for security Peter 2022-07-12 03:56:03+00:00
• Security problems with relying on transaction fees for security Bram Cohen 2022-07-12 02:47:43+00:00
• Security problems with relying on transaction fees for security Peter Todd 2022-07-12 00:37:11+00:00
• Security problems with relying on transaction fees for security Peter Todd 2022-07-12 00:31:19+00:00
• Security problems with relying on transaction fees for security Russell O'Connor 2022-07-12 00:21:40+00:00
• Security problems with relying on transaction fees for security James MacWhyte 2022-07-12 00:01:09+00:00
• Security problems with relying on transaction fees for security Anthony Towns 2022-07-11 23:29:47+00:00
• Security problems with relying on transaction fees for security Peter Todd 2022-07-11 22:26:31+00:00
• Security problems with relying on transaction fees for security James MacWhyte 2022-07-11 22:19:06+00:00
• Security problems with relying on transaction fees for security Peter Todd 2022-07-11 21:56:53+00:00
• Security problems with relying on transaction fees for security Peter Todd 2022-07-11 21:53:37+00:00
• Security problems with relying on transaction fees for security Peter Todd 2022-07-11 21:36:52+00:00
• Security problems with relying on transaction fees for security Pox 2022-07-11 21:18:10+00:00
• Security problems with relying on transaction fees for security Erik Aronesty 2022-07-11 20:52:39+00:00
• Security problems with relying on transaction fees for security Russell O'Connor 2022-07-11 20:35:02+00:00
• Security problems with relying on transaction fees for security vjudeu at gazeta.pl 2022-07-11 19:45:39+00:00
• Security problems with relying on transaction fees for security Erik Aronesty 2022-07-11 18:43:27+00:00
• Security problems with relying on transaction fees for security micaroni at gmail.com 2022-07-11 18:38:34+00:00
• Security problems with relying on transaction fees for security Bram Cohen 2022-07-11 18:12:52+00:00

Published on: 2022-07-15T06:03:57+00:00

Summary:

According to a recent discussion on the bitcoin-dev mailing list, there are several important considerations regarding the emission curve and distribution of coins in Bitcoin. The shape of the emission curve is crucial for ensuring a fair distribution, as poorly shaped curves can lead to uneven distribution. Bitcoin's emission curve lasts over 100 years, with a small amount of bitcoin being emitted during the last 100 years from 2040-2140. In terms of expected time of emission, Bitcoin's curve equals about six years.The discussion also compares the emission curves of various cryptocurrencies. PoS coins like Algorand have an expected emission time of 0, indicating a rapid emission rate. However, there is one coin whose expected emission time is larger than Bitcoin's, at approximately 50 years. Another coin, Dogecoin (DOGE), has recently joined the ranks with an expected emission time of 33 years. This limited supply characteristic of Bitcoin and DOGE is seen as a positive attribute for investors, which may attract more attention to these coins.The debate on designing protocols for "price go up forever" is discussed, with differing perspectives within the Bitcoin community. Some argue that protocols should be designed based on the belief that Bitcoin will grow in utility compared to fiat currencies. They believe that if Bitcoin fails to do so, then there would be no point in using it anyway. Others, however, express concern over designing protocols with assumptions of perpetual price growth, considering it a bad idea. This highlights the importance of careful protocol design to ensure the long-term success and sustainability of the network.BIP119, also known as OP_CTV, is mentioned as a design that enables value to be assigned in a predetermined tree of payments. This allows for batched transactions and smoothing out mining fees. OP_CTV can also be used to shift transaction fees to later blocks, providing an effective solution whenever smoothing transaction fees would be beneficial. It is noted that OP_CTV allows for slightly different payment channels compared to the existing Lightning Network, enabling onboarding of a large number of individuals to payment channels.The future of mining is discussed, with the suggestion that it could become a public service rather than a for-profit business model. Game theory suggests that large holders will likely be the major players in mining, and they have the means, ability, and incentive to secure their funds. The importance of advertising this fact is emphasized. It is also mentioned that mining will need to transition to a public service when there is a backlog and every nation is on board for game theoretic reasons.Peter Todd suggests emergency measures to smooth out fees, such as having a separate mandatory category of fees or using a fixed minimum fee that is repaid by the miner into a pool. These suggestions aim to address the issue of fee smoothing effectively. The conversation also touches on the topic of using bribes to incentivize miners to build on a particular block, with considerations of centralization pressure and the viability of leaving transactions in the mempool as incentives.In a recent discussion on the bitcoin-dev mailing list, the potential consequences of relying solely on transaction fees for Bitcoin's security were explored. One concern raised was the established day/night cycle with fees dropping to zero overnight and longer gaps on weekends and holidays. This could result in fewer blocks being mined overnight and miners adopting strategies such as waiting for enough fees in the mempool before attempting to make a block. However, this strategy may lead to miners with lower costs of operation reorging the last hour of the day overnight, causing miners with more expensive operations to stop mining preemptively. This slippery slope could ultimately result in a mining cabal that attacks the whole system.To address this issue, several potential solutions were suggested. One proposal involved having transaction fees be about 10% of rewards on average, striking a balance between incentivizing fee collection and avoiding skewed incentives. Another suggestion was to smooth out fees over time by having wallets collect dust during periods of low transaction fees. Additionally, creating a user experience that clarifies when transactions may take longer but are reliable could help alleviate user aversion to longer transaction times.However, some unrealistic solutions were also proposed, such as dragging most of East Asia eastward to a later time zone or hard forking in fixed rewards in perpetuity. These solutions were deemed problematic and impractical.Overall, the discussion highlighted the importance of considering the potential impact of transaction fees on Bitcoin's security and the need to find feasible measures to address any potential issues that may arise.

Updated on: 2023-08-02T07:00:56.931840+00:00