<oembed><type>rich</type><version>1.0</version><author_name>npub17rld56k4365lfphyd8u8kwuejey5xcazdxptserx03wc4jc9g24stx9l2h</author_name><author_url>https://nostr.ae/npub17rld56k4365lfphyd8u8kwuejey5xcazdxptserx03wc4jc9g24stx9l2h</author_url><provider_name>njump</provider_name><provider_url>https://nostr.ae</provider_url><html>📅 Original date posted:2022-07-11&#xA;📝 Original message:On Mon, Jul 11, 2022 at 11:12:52AM -0700, Bram Cohen via bitcoin-dev wrote:&#xA;&gt; If transaction fees came in at an even rate over time all at the exact same&#xA;&gt; level then they work fine for security, acting similarly to fixed block&#xA;&gt; rewards. Unfortunately that isn&#39;t how it works in the real world.&#xA;&#xA;That just becomes a market design question. There&#39;s been some trivial&#xA;effort put into that for bitcoin (ie, getting people to actually chooses&#xA;fees based on the weight of their transaction, and having weight be the&#xA;sole limiting factor for miners), but not a lot, and there&#39;s evidence&#xA;both from previous times in Bitcoin&#39;s history and from altcoin&#39;s that&#xA;the market can support higher fees.&#xA;&#xA;Should we work on that today, though? It doesn&#39;t seem smart to me:&#xA;the subsidy is already quite substantial ($6.5 billion USD per year at&#xA;current prices) so raising fees to 10% of block reward would transfer&#xA;another $650M USD from bitcoin users to miners (or ASIC manfucturers&#xA;and electricity producers) each year, achieving what? Refuting some FUD?&#xA;&#xA;Cheers,&#xA;aj</html></oembed>