rich1.0Tom Harding [ARCHIVE] (npub1ms…pmwjy)https://nostr.ae/npub1msef5qkfwz4t7qacwxz775wgdtlytph78g2g2z903x90874u263sypmwjynjumphttps://nostr.ae📅 Original date posted:2015-07-30 📝 Original message:Yes. So far, the transaction count factor has completely dominated the per-tx fee factor. This fact should be of great interest to miners. On 7/30/2015 7:25 AM, Dave Hudson wrote: > >> On 30 Jul 2015, at 06:14, Tom Harding via bitcoin-dev >> <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org >> <mailto:bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org>> wrote: >> >> Another empirical fact also needs explaining. Why have average fees *as >> measured in BTC* risen during the times of highest public interest in >> bitcoin? This happened without block size pressure, and it is not an >> exchange rate effect -- these are raw BTC fees: >> >> https://blockchain.info/charts/transaction-fees?timespan=all&daysAverageString=7 > > I've not published any new figures for about 8 months (will try to do > that this weekend), but the thing that that chart doesn't show is > what's actually happening to fees per transaction. Here's a chart that > does: http://hashingit.com/analysis/35-the-future-of-bitcoin-transaction-fees > > The data is also taken from blockchain.info so it's apples-for-apples. > It shows that far from a fees going up they spent 3 years dropping. I > just ran a new chart and the decline in fees continued until about 8 > weeks when the "stress tests" first occurred. Even so, they're still > below the level from the end of 2013. By comparison the total > transaction volume is up about 2.4x to 2.5x (don't have the exact number). > >> ... more evidence that conclusively refutes the conjecture that a >> production quota is necessary for a "functioning fee market." A >> production quota merely pushes up fees. We have a functioning market, >> and so far, it shows that wider bitcoin usage is even more effective >> than a quota at pushing up fees. > > I think it's equally easy to argue (from the same data) that wider > adoption has actually caused wallet users to become much more > effective at fee selection. Miners (as expected, assuming that they > hadn't formed a cartel) have continued to accept whatever fees are > available, no matter how small. Only where there has been an element > of scarcity have we actually seen miners do anything but take whatever > is offered. > > Clearly history is not an accurate indicator of what might happen in > the future, but it seems difficult to argue that there has been any > sort of fee market emerge to date (other than as a result of scarcity > during the stress tests). >