From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd•org>
To: Jeremy Spilman <jeremy@taplink•co>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Making fee estimation better
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2013 18:49:38 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131025224938.GB18030@petertodd.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <op.w5h2rwhcyldrnw@laptop-air>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1372 bytes --]
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 12:51:22AM -0700, Jeremy Spilman wrote:
> Gavin, can you confirm the best place to read up on the discuss
> fee estimation changes for v0.9?
>
> I think fee estimation at its core is about providing a data point,
> or even call it an API, which can be used however you see fit.
>
> What parameters do I want to see in a 'fee estimation' API?
>
> - 30 minutes vs 24 hours processing time
> - Confidence Levels (50%/90%)
>
> What properties does the result have?
> - Is it globally consistent?
>
> Talking about fees.. I read this:
> https://gist.github.com/gavinandresen/2961409 and there is so much
> there I really liked.
State-of-the-art thinking has changed a lot; that document is over a
year old and needs significant changes to update it.
> Any pointers for reading more about the leading theories on
> transaction fees? For example, how well do they correlate with
> network security? Are we getting what we are paying for? :-)
Network security is currently funded by inflation rather than
transaction fees. This is likely to remain true for at least a few more
years. FWIW the cost of that security on a per transaction basis is
about $18, see http://blockchain.info/charts/cost-per-transaction
--
'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
0000000000000009b86605cc3235f2674600d5131dd437d941b479e78588177b
[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-10-25 22:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-10-24 14:30 Peter Todd
2013-10-24 14:38 ` Mike Hearn
2013-10-24 14:43 ` Peter Todd
2013-10-24 14:46 ` Mike Hearn
2013-10-24 14:54 ` Peter Todd
2013-10-24 20:39 ` Gavin Andresen
2013-10-25 7:07 ` Peter Todd
2013-10-25 12:02 ` Andreas Petersson
2013-10-25 13:29 ` Mark Friedenbach
2013-10-25 14:08 ` Andreas Petersson
2013-10-25 16:13 ` Peter Todd
2013-10-25 19:35 ` Jeremy Spilman
2013-10-25 22:13 ` Peter Todd
2013-10-25 7:51 ` Jeremy Spilman
2013-10-25 22:49 ` Peter Todd [this message]
2013-10-26 0:25 ` Gavin Andresen
2013-10-26 7:28 ` Peter Todd
2013-10-28 7:17 ` John Dillon
2013-11-04 10:52 ` [Bitcoin-development] Zeroconf-safe tx replacement (replace-for-fee) Peter Todd
2013-11-04 11:10 ` Adam Back
2013-11-04 11:59 ` Peter Todd
[not found] <mailman.289181.1382717617.21953.bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
2013-10-25 16:40 ` [Bitcoin-development] Making fee estimation better Tamas Blummer
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20131025224938.GB18030@petertodd.org \
--to=pete@petertodd$(echo .)org \
--cc=bitcoin-development@lists$(echo .)sourceforge.net \
--cc=jeremy@taplink$(echo .)co \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox