rich1.0npub1ldcq03p2qe58u0xnlwa35wchjuhz49y6ueu5ghmtjetez9xstnvsmt8ur6https://nostr.ae/npub1ldcq03p2qe58u0xnlwa35wchjuhz49y6ueu5ghmtjetez9xstnvsmt8ur6njumphttps://nostr.ae📅 Original date posted:2022-07-11 📝 Original message:On Mon, Jul 11, 2022 at 2:53 PM Peter Todd <pete at petertodd.org> wrote: > > The only type of fee-smoothing scheme that is feasible is to smooth an > entirely > separate category of fees that are made mandatory. For example, you could > achieve the economic impact of inflation by having a fixed value*time > based fee > that goes to timelocked anyone-can-spend outputs in the coinbase to push > the > fee forward to other miners. > I'm not sure what the implications would be of charging coins for moving based on their value times how long since they last moved would be (I *think* that's what you're suggesting). It isn't obviously bad, but feels weird to me. That said, a scheme which would work would be to have a fixed minimum fee of satoshis/vbyte which is required to be repaid out by the miner into a pool and they get back a fixed fraction of what was in that pool. The pool could simply be a rolling coin which keeps the balance. That's still a bit ugly but doesn't lessen block size significantly, is fairly coherent, and is a soft fork. It's the best emergency measure I'm aware of. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20220711/519eb7bd/attachment.html>