{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub17rld56k4365lfphyd8u8kwuejey5xcazdxptserx03wc4jc9g24stx9l2h","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub17rld56k4365lfphyd8u8kwuejey5xcazdxptserx03wc4jc9g24stx9l2h","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2022-07-11\n📝 Original message:On Mon, Jul 11, 2022 at 11:12:52AM -0700, Bram Cohen via bitcoin-dev wrote:\n\u003e If transaction fees came in at an even rate over time all at the exact same\n\u003e level then they work fine for security, acting similarly to fixed block\n\u003e rewards. Unfortunately that isn't how it works in the real world.\n\nThat just becomes a market design question. There's been some trivial\neffort put into that for bitcoin (ie, getting people to actually chooses\nfees based on the weight of their transaction, and having weight be the\nsole limiting factor for miners), but not a lot, and there's evidence\nboth from previous times in Bitcoin's history and from altcoin's that\nthe market can support higher fees.\n\nShould we work on that today, though? It doesn't seem smart to me:\nthe subsidy is already quite substantial ($6.5 billion USD per year at\ncurrent prices) so raising fees to 10% of block reward would transfer\nanother $650M USD from bitcoin users to miners (or ASIC manfucturers\nand electricity producers) each year, achieving what? Refuting some FUD?\n\nCheers,\naj"}