{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub19jx6yq5fyvvcn3zlf0f60kr78q7wq5fy5qd9yqlqwumlqqcfc8rsl7fxhj","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub19jx6yq5fyvvcn3zlf0f60kr78q7wq5fy5qd9yqlqwumlqqcfc8rsl7fxhj","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2015-07-30\n📝 Original message:I shouldn't have said unlimited, i should have said a greater blocksize\nlimit such as 8mb.\n\nAnyways, why is that the assumption?  If a miner can do so, and do so\nprofitably, isn't that just competition?  Isn't that what we want?  If a\nminer can mine low transaction fees at a profit then don't they deserve to\nhave their spot?  Surely if they do so unprofitably they quickly find\nthemselves out of business?  Besides, if a miner mines low fee transactions\nby breaking rank, how does this affect another miner EXCEPT for the\nadditional blocksize load.  I would maintain this is just competition\namongst miners gentlemen.  And it's a good thing.\n\nRight now things are distorted because most income comes from the coinbase,\nbut as transaction fees start to constitute the majority of income this\nidea seems to have more importance.\nOn Jul 29, 2015 11:00 PM, \"Adam Back\" \u003cadam at cypherspace.org\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e On 29 July 2015 at 20:41, Ryan Butler via bitcoin-dev\n\u003e \u003cbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003e \u003e Does an unlimited blocksize imply the lack of a fee market?  Isn't every\n\u003e \u003e miner able to set their minimum accepted fee or transaction acceptance\n\u003e \u003e algorithm?\n\u003e\n\u003e The assumption is that wont work because any miner can break ranks and\n\u003e do so profitably, so to expect otherwise is to expect oligopoly\n\u003e behaviour which is the sort of antithesis of a decentralised mining\n\u003e system.  It's in fact a similar argument as to why decentralisation of\n\u003e mining provides policy neutrality: some miner somewhere with some\n\u003e hashrate will process your transaction even if some other miners are\n\u003e by policy deciding not to mine it.  It is also similar reason why free\n\u003e transactions are processed today - policies vary and this is good for\n\u003e ensuring many types of transaction get processed.\n\u003e\n\u003e Adam\n\u003e\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150729/f665c813/attachment-0001.html\u003e"}