Poll
Question: Closing BTC Price June 28:
$0 - 5 (2.6%)
<$7,000 - 4 (2.1%)
$7,000-$7,499 - 0 (0%)
$7,500-$7,999 - 0 (0%)
$8,000-$8,499 - 1 (0.5%)
$8,500-$8,999 - 3 (1.6%)
$9,000-$9,499 - 4 (2.1%)
$9,500-$9,999 - 27 (14.2%)
$10,000-$10,499 - 26 (13.7%)
$10,500-10,999 - 15 (7.9%)
$11,000-$11,499 - 14 (7.4%)
$11,500-$12,000 - 17 (8.9%)
>$12,000 - 59 (31.1%)
>$20,000 - 15 (7.9%)
Total Voters: 190

Pages: « 1 ... 15005 15006 15007 15008 15009 15010 15011 15012 15013 15014 15015 15016 15017 15018 15019 15020 15021 15022 15023 15024 15025 15026 15027 15028 15029 15030 15031 15032 15033 15034 15035 15036 15037 15038 15039 15040 15041 15042 15043 15044 15045 15046 15047 15048 15049 15050 15051 15052 15053 15054 [15055] 15056 15057 15058 15059 15060 15061 15062 15063 15064 15065 15066 15067 15068 15069 15070 15071 15072 15073 15074 15075 15076 15077 15078 15079 15080 15081 15082 15083 15084 15085 15086 15087 15088 15089 15090 15091 15092 15093 15094 15095 15096 15097 15098 15099 15100 15101 15102 15103 15104 15105 ... 24401 »
  Reply  |  Watch  |  Notify  |  Mark unread  |  Print  
Author Topic: Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion  (Read 21254346 times)
This is a self-moderated topic. If you do not want to be moderated by the person who started this topic, create a new topic. (68 posts by 16 users deleted.)
AliceGored
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 117
Merit: 10


View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
March 10, 2016, 10:03:51 AM

Due to economy of scale and some miners having lower verification costs, it creates a race to the bottom of purging all but the most efficient miner (centralization).  With increasing block sizes, there would likely be some huge miner that accepts 0.00000001 fee transactions while doing so would cause others to go bankrupt.  Or the mega miner could just accept tiny or 0 fee transactions in the short term in order to bankrupt opponents.  Hence a minimum transaction fee puts a floor on how low of a race to the bottom tactic you can enact.  

Minimum transaction fee is the spam prevention mechanism of Bitcoin, not block size!  The miners are unable to create one themselves because it would require collusion and it's also an attack vector they use against each other!  That is why I say developers have to create a minimum transaction fee for each block size interval they set in order to scale Bitcoin.

Oh wise central planners. Please pick the best arbitrary economic variables possible... and only with unanimous neckbeard consensus in irc. These miners are hell bent on choking out this golden goose given the chance.

You keep looking but you can't find the woods
While you're hiding in the trees



Except you don't understand it's impossible for Bitcoin to not have central bankers unless it has an unlimited block size and no min transaction fee.  Now that we've established Bitcoin already has central bankers (the developers with the miners having a veto override), they should actually use the correct variable in order to block spam (min transaction fee) instead of using the wrong one (block size).

That's like saying it's not possible to have a McLaren F1 without the Ameritech front bumperettes and a 1.8L. It is, and it's worth insisting on.