{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub1r3san9v5njl6798hvauyu9ntm6r9c7u8s0t65wls58gpfdcvqp5sa48d0u","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub1r3san9v5njl6798hvauyu9ntm6r9c7u8s0t65wls58gpfdcvqp5sa48d0u","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2015-05-08\n📝 Original message:On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 3:43 PM, Aaron Voisine \u003cvoisine at gmail.com\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e This is a clever way to tie block size to fees.\n\u003e\n\u003e I would just like to point out though that it still fundamentally is using\n\u003e hard block size limits to enforce scarcity. Transactions with below market\n\u003e fees will hang in limbo for days and fail, instead of failing immediately\n\u003e by not propagating, or seeing degraded, long confirmation times followed by\n\u003e eventual success.\n\u003e\n\nThere are already solutions to this which are waiting to be deployed as\ndefault policy to bitcoind, and need to be implemented in other clients:\nreplace-by-fee and child-pays-for-parent.\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150508/a030d88b/attachment.html\u003e"}