* Re: [bitcoindev] HODL Tax Proposal
@ 2024-08-01 21:55 Christian Riley
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Christian Riley @ 2024-08-01 21:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard Greaser; +Cc: Bitcoin Development Mailing List
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/html, Size: 3398 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [bitcoindev] HODL Tax Proposal
2024-08-02 1:19 ` Jimmy Song
2024-08-02 2:03 ` George Burke
@ 2024-08-02 5:08 ` 'hashnoncemessage' via Bitcoin Development Mailing List
1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: 'hashnoncemessage' via Bitcoin Development Mailing List @ 2024-08-02 5:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jimmy Song
Cc: Keagan McClelland, José Edil Guimarães de Medeiros,
Richard Greaser, Bitcoin Development Mailing List
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5673 bytes --]
obvious troll is obvious
thanks dick greaser
> Like Paul Sztorc's previous proposals, this one has zero negative trade offs.
okay i lolled
On Fri, Aug 2, 2024 at 03:19, Jimmy Song <[jaejoon@gmail•com](mailto:On Fri, Aug 2, 2024 at 03:19, Jimmy Song <<a href=)> wrote:
> For those that haven't figured this out yet, the name on the original proposal (Dick Greaser) is the editor or the Bitcoin Bugle, a satirical "news" site. He's trolling the list.
>
> On Thu, Aug 1, 2024, 8:57 PM Keagan McClelland <keagan.mcclelland@gmail•com> wrote:
>
>> Hypothetically miners could attempt to adopt a mining/relay policy wherein they consider the age of the utxo being spent and factor that into the feerate they consider when accepting the transaction into their block template. However this would be an opt-in mechanism and miners can choose to not take this into consideration when making the choice to mine the transaction or not. If enough hashpower adopted this policy, you could end up with a de-facto demurrage tax. This also means that you can do this without a consensus fork if there was appetite for it.
>>
>> However, I suspect there will be extreme resistance to this proposal and it is unlikely that miners would intentionally leave otherwise-good fees on the table simply because they want to play prisoners dilemma games where they lose fees to the competition.
>>
>> Keags
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 1, 2024 at 5:18 PM José Edil Guimarães de Medeiros <jose.edil@gmail•com> wrote:
>>
>>> Not sure if I should consider this a joke after the president of bitcoin thing, but I just got curious about a basic technical detail and wanted to stress the concept.
>>>
>>> Since the value "tokens" in Bitcoin are the utxos, outputs from transactions that have not been spent in another transaction, and since the sole purpose of the utxos are to atomically serve as input to a subsequent transaction, how do you proposed to "tax" them?
>>>
>>> I mean, let's say someone sent me 1 BTC to address X by building a simple p2pkh transaction with the address I provided. To move that 1 BTC mean to authorize it as an input to a new transaction. In principle, that can only be done by me producing a valid signature using a private key.
>>>
>>> Let's say I'm one of those infamous holders. How do you propose the tax to be implemented?
>>>
>>> All the best.
>>>
>>> --
>>> E...
>>>
>>>> On 1 Aug 2024, at 18:13, Richard Greaser <thebitcoinbugle@gmail•com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>
>>>> It has become apparent to me that there is an issue where users of the network holding their coins, are not adding value to the network.
>>>> As miners continue to get squeezed post halving, they would benefit tremendously from fees being taken from individuals refusing to move their coins, providing increased security to the network.
>>>>
>>>> I have written out a proposal more in depth and is attached below.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups•com.
>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit [https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/6512db18-bd15-462e-92fd-7549b5e885e7n%40googlegroups.com](https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/6512db18-bd15-462e-92fd-7549b5e885e7n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer).
>>>>
>>>> <hodltax.md>
>>>
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups•com.
>>> To view this discussion on the web visit [https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/C7829BDC-1273-49C9-BE03-F00823A94C3D%40gmail.com](https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/C7829BDC-1273-49C9-BE03-F00823A94C3D%40gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer).
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups•com.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit [https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/CALeFGL2ngsRd3N%2B8L7u9ZLNQB084xqcMZ04Dp3J53CEBHBxQcg%40mail.gmail.com](https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/CALeFGL2ngsRd3N%2B8L7u9ZLNQB084xqcMZ04Dp3J53CEBHBxQcg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer).
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups•com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit [https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/CAJR7vkqSLkLDv%2By8D%2BaFC4pFDbtSmfrppyd5gMqG9fK_QTu6rw%40mail.gmail.com](https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/CAJR7vkqSLkLDv%2By8D%2BaFC4pFDbtSmfrppyd5gMqG9fK_QTu6rw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer).
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups•com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/oc8cflA0txTPabsX0Xmc6QBHFHKQyQrXG5LbieiT4Z77jDQ-lJ_BiLyVK7-_pqXa_n6w1ZCvyVXHpKO4X16_4oKgbGVzwD133J0uziAGnSw%3D%40proton.me.
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 7869 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [bitcoindev] HODL Tax Proposal
2024-08-02 1:19 ` Jimmy Song
@ 2024-08-02 2:03 ` George Burke
2024-08-02 5:08 ` 'hashnoncemessage' via Bitcoin Development Mailing List
1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: George Burke @ 2024-08-02 2:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jimmy Song
Cc: Bitcoin Development Mailing List,
José Edil Guimarães de Medeiros, Keagan McClelland,
Richard Greaser
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5922 bytes --]
Jimmy, he might be trolling but he replied privately to me with a very
thoughtful (though disagreeable) rebuttal. Hard to consider this satirical.
Sent from Mobile
--
George Burke
CMO, FounderPool.co
Cofounder, PortalDeFi.com
Silicon Valley Bitcoin, Organizer
San Francisco, CA | San Juan, PR
On Thu, Aug 1, 2024 at 6:57 PM Jimmy Song <jaejoon@gmail•com> wrote:
> For those that haven't figured this out yet, the name on the original
> proposal (Dick Greaser) is the editor or the Bitcoin Bugle, a satirical
> "news" site. He's trolling the list.
>
> On Thu, Aug 1, 2024, 8:57 PM Keagan McClelland <
> keagan.mcclelland@gmail•com> wrote:
>
>> Hypothetically miners could attempt to adopt a mining/relay policy
>> wherein they consider the age of the utxo being spent and factor that into
>> the feerate they consider when accepting the transaction into their block
>> template. However this would be an opt-in mechanism and miners can choose
>> to not take this into consideration when making the choice to mine the
>> transaction or not. If enough hashpower adopted this policy, you could end
>> up with a de-facto demurrage tax. This also means that you can do this
>> without a consensus fork if there was appetite for it.
>>
>> However, I suspect there will be extreme resistance to this proposal and
>> it is unlikely that miners would intentionally leave otherwise-good fees on
>> the table simply because they want to play prisoners dilemma games where
>> they lose fees to the competition.
>>
>> Keags
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 1, 2024 at 5:18 PM José Edil Guimarães de Medeiros <
>> jose.edil@gmail•com> wrote:
>>
>>> Not sure if I should consider this a joke after the president of bitcoin
>>> thing, but I just got curious about a basic technical detail and wanted to
>>> stress the concept.
>>>
>>> Since the value "tokens" in Bitcoin are the utxos, outputs from
>>> transactions that have not been spent in another transaction, and since the
>>> sole purpose of the utxos are to atomically serve as input to a subsequent
>>> transaction, how do you proposed to "tax" them?
>>>
>>> I mean, let's say someone sent me 1 BTC to address X by building a
>>> simple p2pkh transaction with the address I provided. To move that 1 BTC
>>> mean to authorize it as an input to a new transaction. In principle, that
>>> can only be done by me producing a valid signature using a private key.
>>>
>>> Let's say I'm one of those infamous holders. How do you propose the tax
>>> to be implemented?
>>>
>>> All the best.
>>> --
>>> E...
>>>
>>> On 1 Aug 2024, at 18:13, Richard Greaser <thebitcoinbugle@gmail•com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi everyone,
>>>
>>> It has become apparent to me that there is an issue where users of the
>>> network holding their coins, are not adding value to the network.
>>>
>>> As miners continue to get squeezed post halving, they would benefit
>>> tremendously from fees being taken from individuals refusing to move their
>>> coins, providing increased security to the network.
>>>
>>> I have written out a proposal more in depth and is attached below.
>>>
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>> an email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups•com.
>>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/6512db18-bd15-462e-92fd-7549b5e885e7n%40googlegroups.com
>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/6512db18-bd15-462e-92fd-7549b5e885e7n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>> .
>>> <hodltax.md>
>>>
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>> an email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups•com.
>>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/C7829BDC-1273-49C9-BE03-F00823A94C3D%40gmail.com
>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/C7829BDC-1273-49C9-BE03-F00823A94C3D%40gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>> .
>>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups•com.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/CALeFGL2ngsRd3N%2B8L7u9ZLNQB084xqcMZ04Dp3J53CEBHBxQcg%40mail.gmail.com
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/CALeFGL2ngsRd3N%2B8L7u9ZLNQB084xqcMZ04Dp3J53CEBHBxQcg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>> .
>>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups•com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/CAJR7vkqSLkLDv%2By8D%2BaFC4pFDbtSmfrppyd5gMqG9fK_QTu6rw%40mail.gmail.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/CAJR7vkqSLkLDv%2By8D%2BaFC4pFDbtSmfrppyd5gMqG9fK_QTu6rw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups•com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/CAHYx7BtwRyYSL9Hdv%3D5nbdzBBb3fZmW_VYSWSZZneUUsVyBEkQ%40mail.gmail.com.
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 8136 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [bitcoindev] HODL Tax Proposal
2024-08-02 0:28 ` Keagan McClelland
@ 2024-08-02 1:19 ` Jimmy Song
2024-08-02 2:03 ` George Burke
2024-08-02 5:08 ` 'hashnoncemessage' via Bitcoin Development Mailing List
0 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Jimmy Song @ 2024-08-02 1:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Keagan McClelland
Cc: José Edil Guimarães de Medeiros, Richard Greaser,
Bitcoin Development Mailing List
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4844 bytes --]
For those that haven't figured this out yet, the name on the original
proposal (Dick Greaser) is the editor or the Bitcoin Bugle, a satirical
"news" site. He's trolling the list.
On Thu, Aug 1, 2024, 8:57 PM Keagan McClelland <keagan.mcclelland@gmail•com>
wrote:
> Hypothetically miners could attempt to adopt a mining/relay policy wherein
> they consider the age of the utxo being spent and factor that into the
> feerate they consider when accepting the transaction into their block
> template. However this would be an opt-in mechanism and miners can choose
> to not take this into consideration when making the choice to mine the
> transaction or not. If enough hashpower adopted this policy, you could end
> up with a de-facto demurrage tax. This also means that you can do this
> without a consensus fork if there was appetite for it.
>
> However, I suspect there will be extreme resistance to this proposal and
> it is unlikely that miners would intentionally leave otherwise-good fees on
> the table simply because they want to play prisoners dilemma games where
> they lose fees to the competition.
>
> Keags
>
> On Thu, Aug 1, 2024 at 5:18 PM José Edil Guimarães de Medeiros <
> jose.edil@gmail•com> wrote:
>
>> Not sure if I should consider this a joke after the president of bitcoin
>> thing, but I just got curious about a basic technical detail and wanted to
>> stress the concept.
>>
>> Since the value "tokens" in Bitcoin are the utxos, outputs from
>> transactions that have not been spent in another transaction, and since the
>> sole purpose of the utxos are to atomically serve as input to a subsequent
>> transaction, how do you proposed to "tax" them?
>>
>> I mean, let's say someone sent me 1 BTC to address X by building a simple
>> p2pkh transaction with the address I provided. To move that 1 BTC mean to
>> authorize it as an input to a new transaction. In principle, that can only
>> be done by me producing a valid signature using a private key.
>>
>> Let's say I'm one of those infamous holders. How do you propose the tax
>> to be implemented?
>>
>> All the best.
>> --
>> E...
>>
>> On 1 Aug 2024, at 18:13, Richard Greaser <thebitcoinbugle@gmail•com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> It has become apparent to me that there is an issue where users of the
>> network holding their coins, are not adding value to the network.
>>
>> As miners continue to get squeezed post halving, they would benefit
>> tremendously from fees being taken from individuals refusing to move their
>> coins, providing increased security to the network.
>>
>> I have written out a proposal more in depth and is attached below.
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups•com.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/6512db18-bd15-462e-92fd-7549b5e885e7n%40googlegroups.com
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/6512db18-bd15-462e-92fd-7549b5e885e7n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>> .
>> <hodltax.md>
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups•com.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/C7829BDC-1273-49C9-BE03-F00823A94C3D%40gmail.com
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/C7829BDC-1273-49C9-BE03-F00823A94C3D%40gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>> .
>>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups•com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/CALeFGL2ngsRd3N%2B8L7u9ZLNQB084xqcMZ04Dp3J53CEBHBxQcg%40mail.gmail.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/CALeFGL2ngsRd3N%2B8L7u9ZLNQB084xqcMZ04Dp3J53CEBHBxQcg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups•com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/CAJR7vkqSLkLDv%2By8D%2BaFC4pFDbtSmfrppyd5gMqG9fK_QTu6rw%40mail.gmail.com.
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 6564 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [bitcoindev] HODL Tax Proposal
2024-08-01 21:59 ` José Edil Guimarães de Medeiros
@ 2024-08-02 0:28 ` Keagan McClelland
2024-08-02 1:19 ` Jimmy Song
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Keagan McClelland @ 2024-08-02 0:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: José Edil Guimarães de Medeiros
Cc: Richard Greaser, Bitcoin Development Mailing List
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3893 bytes --]
Hypothetically miners could attempt to adopt a mining/relay policy wherein
they consider the age of the utxo being spent and factor that into the
feerate they consider when accepting the transaction into their block
template. However this would be an opt-in mechanism and miners can choose
to not take this into consideration when making the choice to mine the
transaction or not. If enough hashpower adopted this policy, you could end
up with a de-facto demurrage tax. This also means that you can do this
without a consensus fork if there was appetite for it.
However, I suspect there will be extreme resistance to this proposal and it
is unlikely that miners would intentionally leave otherwise-good fees on
the table simply because they want to play prisoners dilemma games where
they lose fees to the competition.
Keags
On Thu, Aug 1, 2024 at 5:18 PM José Edil Guimarães de Medeiros <
jose.edil@gmail•com> wrote:
> Not sure if I should consider this a joke after the president of bitcoin
> thing, but I just got curious about a basic technical detail and wanted to
> stress the concept.
>
> Since the value "tokens" in Bitcoin are the utxos, outputs from
> transactions that have not been spent in another transaction, and since the
> sole purpose of the utxos are to atomically serve as input to a subsequent
> transaction, how do you proposed to "tax" them?
>
> I mean, let's say someone sent me 1 BTC to address X by building a simple
> p2pkh transaction with the address I provided. To move that 1 BTC mean to
> authorize it as an input to a new transaction. In principle, that can only
> be done by me producing a valid signature using a private key.
>
> Let's say I'm one of those infamous holders. How do you propose the tax to
> be implemented?
>
> All the best.
> --
> E...
>
> On 1 Aug 2024, at 18:13, Richard Greaser <thebitcoinbugle@gmail•com>
> wrote:
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> It has become apparent to me that there is an issue where users of the
> network holding their coins, are not adding value to the network.
>
> As miners continue to get squeezed post halving, they would benefit
> tremendously from fees being taken from individuals refusing to move their
> coins, providing increased security to the network.
>
> I have written out a proposal more in depth and is attached below.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups•com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/6512db18-bd15-462e-92fd-7549b5e885e7n%40googlegroups.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/6512db18-bd15-462e-92fd-7549b5e885e7n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
> <hodltax.md>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups•com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/C7829BDC-1273-49C9-BE03-F00823A94C3D%40gmail.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/C7829BDC-1273-49C9-BE03-F00823A94C3D%40gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups•com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/CALeFGL2ngsRd3N%2B8L7u9ZLNQB084xqcMZ04Dp3J53CEBHBxQcg%40mail.gmail.com.
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 5129 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [bitcoindev] HODL Tax Proposal
2024-08-01 21:03 Richard Greaser
2024-08-01 21:59 ` José Edil Guimarães de Medeiros
2024-08-01 23:38 ` George Burke
@ 2024-08-02 0:12 ` Keagan McClelland
2 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Keagan McClelland @ 2024-08-02 0:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard Greaser; +Cc: Bitcoin Development Mailing List
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3203 bytes --]
This is never going to happen.
While demurrage has been proposed before and may ultimately be a
consideration that the Bitcoin users want to ensure that costs are borne
fairly by the different use cases, this mechanism is somewhat laughable.
The proposal you present also seems to reflect a deep misunderstanding of
how the Bitcoin protocol works:
1. Self assigning a bip number defies the bip assignment process and claims
a level of legitimacy that this proposal does not have.
2. Bitcoin for the most part does not really understand "days". There is a
timestamping mechanism that is used to reconcile difficulty adjustment
periods with the targeted time, but this is not something that can be more
widely used.
3. The way that "balances" are tracked and audited by Bitcoin nodes does
not lend itself easily to being just "deducted from"
4. You cannot "automatically deduct" a fee from an "address". Addresses
don't technically exist at the protocol level.
5. Miners do not "contribute proportionally" to computational work of
finding a block. There's the winner, and then everyone else.
6. Bitcoin cannot and will not make any legal or jurisdictional
considerations whatsoever when considering design choices.
7. Dennis Porter is irrelevant and does not have any authority to grant or
withhold "permission"
8. This proposal, like all demurrage proposals, clearly has negative
tradeoffs to be considered.
9. Centrally planning the price and inactivity period of demurrage is
antithetical to Bitcoin's decentralized market design mechanisms in use
thus far.
Stick to journalism. Maybe learn about Bitcoin a bit before trying to
extract the wealth of savers.
Keags
On Thu, Aug 1, 2024 at 2:13 PM Richard Greaser <thebitcoinbugle@gmail•com>
wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> It has become apparent to me that there is an issue where users of the
> network holding their coins, are not adding value to the network.
>
> As miners continue to get squeezed post halving, they would benefit
> tremendously from fees being taken from individuals refusing to move their
> coins, providing increased security to the network.
>
> I have written out a proposal more in depth and is attached below.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups•com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/6512db18-bd15-462e-92fd-7549b5e885e7n%40googlegroups.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/6512db18-bd15-462e-92fd-7549b5e885e7n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups•com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/CALeFGL0jBUhwmgE3CJ1Sv_UfQHeGq6madh1HQo2DKUek%2BpUpnw%40mail.gmail.com.
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4138 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [bitcoindev] HODL Tax Proposal
2024-08-01 21:03 Richard Greaser
2024-08-01 21:59 ` José Edil Guimarães de Medeiros
@ 2024-08-01 23:38 ` George Burke
2024-08-02 0:12 ` Keagan McClelland
2 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: George Burke @ 2024-08-01 23:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard Greaser; +Cc: Bitcoin Development Mailing List
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2424 bytes --]
A tax on property already owned is something I'm fundamentally against.
Being charged for lack of usage erodes our concept of property ownership,
especially when usage itself sufficiently subsidizes the network. The
"network tax" was already paid on the acquisition of the asset by the
sender, and another network tax will be paid by the current owner upon
every subsequent sale or self-transfer.
My perspective: HODLers are indeed providing a valuable service to the
longevity and growth of network value. They're providing scarcity.
--
*George Burke *
*Co-founder, Portal <https://portaldefi.com/> *
Silicon Valley Bitcoin <https://svbtc.org/>, Organizer
Co-founder, FounderPool <https://founderpool.co/>
San Juan, PR / San Francisco, CA
Keybase <https://keybase.io/geoburke> || OneName
<https://onename.com/geoburke>
*For security, encrypt with my PGP key <https://onename.com/geoburke>*
On Thu, Aug 1, 2024 at 2:13 PM Richard Greaser <thebitcoinbugle@gmail•com>
wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> It has become apparent to me that there is an issue where users of the
> network holding their coins, are not adding value to the network.
>
> As miners continue to get squeezed post halving, they would benefit
> tremendously from fees being taken from individuals refusing to move their
> coins, providing increased security to the network.
>
> I have written out a proposal more in depth and is attached below.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups•com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/6512db18-bd15-462e-92fd-7549b5e885e7n%40googlegroups.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/6512db18-bd15-462e-92fd-7549b5e885e7n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups•com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/CAHYx7Bu9SfTgmLoPJ-7v%3DrY%2BC9pS4p4gO3e7gqKurwRuij8ouA%40mail.gmail.com.
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4337 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [bitcoindev] HODL Tax Proposal
2024-08-01 21:03 Richard Greaser
@ 2024-08-01 21:59 ` José Edil Guimarães de Medeiros
2024-08-02 0:28 ` Keagan McClelland
2024-08-01 23:38 ` George Burke
2024-08-02 0:12 ` Keagan McClelland
2 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: José Edil Guimarães de Medeiros @ 2024-08-01 21:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard Greaser; +Cc: Bitcoin Development Mailing List
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/html, Size: 3126 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [bitcoindev] HODL Tax Proposal
@ 2024-08-01 21:03 Richard Greaser
2024-08-01 21:59 ` José Edil Guimarães de Medeiros
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Richard Greaser @ 2024-08-01 21:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bitcoin Development Mailing List
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 811 bytes --]
Hi everyone,
It has become apparent to me that there is an issue where users of the
network holding their coins, are not adding value to the network.
As miners continue to get squeezed post halving, they would benefit
tremendously from fees being taken from individuals refusing to move their
coins, providing increased security to the network.
I have written out a proposal more in depth and is attached below.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups•com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/6512db18-bd15-462e-92fd-7549b5e885e7n%40googlegroups.com.
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 1131 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: hodltax.md --]
[-- Type: text/markdown, Size: 4779 bytes --]
Richard Greaser Proposes BIP 432: HODL TAX
==========================================
BIP: 432
Layer: Consensus (Hard Fork)
Title: HODL Tax
Author: Richard Greaser [thebitcoinbugle@protonmail.com.com](mailto:thebitcoinbugle@protonmail•com.com)
Comments-Summary: No Comments Yet
Status: Draft
Type: Informational
Created: 2024-07-31
License: BSD-3-Clause
Post History: None but I’m a credentialed journalist
### Abstract
This Bitcoin Improvement Proposal (BIP) suggests implementing an inactivity fee for Bitcoin addresses that do not engage in any outgoing transactions for over 60 days. The collected fees would be distributed to miners, incentivizing network security and promoting more active participation from Bitcoin holders.
### Motivation
The primary motivation behind this proposal is to encourage Bitcoin holders to engage actively with the network, thus promoting decentralization and security. This is also a response to Michael Saylor and PODCONF's attempts to limit Bitcoin to being a corporate treasury asset with Coinbase being a chief custodian. Currently, a significant portion of Bitcoin remains idle, potentially contributing to reduced network liquidity and less frequent fee contributions to miners. Udi is currently failing to sufficiently supplement miner incomes and thus action needs to be taken before Peter Todd's suggestion of tail emissions get any serious momentum. By introducing an inactivity fee, this proposal aims to:
1. Encourage users to engage in the network instead of being rent seeking full time podcast listeners.
2. Provide an additional revenue stream for miners, thus supporting network security and more Bitaxe circulation.
3. Discourage the hoarding of coins without contributing to the network's operation.
### Specification
**Inactivity Fee Mechanism:**
1. **Inactivity Period:** An address will be considered inactive if no outgoing transactions are detected for over 60 days.
2. **Fee Calculation:** The inactivity fee will be a small percentage of the total balance of the inactive address. A proposed rate is 0.1% of the address balance per inactivity period.
3. **Fee Collection:** The fee will be automatically deducted from the address at the end of each inactivity period and added to the mining reward pool of the next block.
4. **Distribution to Miners:** The collected fees will be distributed to miners proportionally, based on the computational work contributed to mining the block.
**Implementation Considerations:**
1. **Threshold and Rate Adjustments:** The inactivity threshold and fee rate can be adjusted based on community feedback and network conditions.
2. **Exemptions:** Certain addresses, such as those holding funds for legal or institutional purposes, may be exempt from this fee, subject to criteria defined by the community.
3. **Technical Challenges:** Implementation will require modifications to the Bitcoin protocol, particularly in how addresses and their activity are tracked.
4. **Proper Permission:** We must also consult the President of Bitcoin, Dennis Porter, as well as FINCEN and other relevant agencies in order to remain compliant.
### Rationale
This proposal seeks to balance the need for increased network activity and miner incentives with the freedom of users to hold their assets without interference. The chosen fee rate and inactivity period aim to be minimal enough to avoid significant financial impact while still encouraging active participation. The HODL meme stands in stark contrast with Satoshi's original goal of Bitcoin acting as Peer to Peer cash.
### Backward Compatibility
This proposal introduces new rules that affect address balances, but does not impact the core transaction mechanisms of Bitcoin. However, it requires changes to the Bitcoin protocol and wallet software to track inactivity and implement fee deductions. Like Paul Sztorc's previous proposals, this one has zero negative trade offs.
### Security Considerations
Ensuring the security of the fee deduction process is crucial. It is vital to prevent unauthorized deductions and ensure that the fee mechanism does not introduce new vulnerabilities to the network. While individuals will likely question whether or not this change will cause issues to the network and change game theory, the more important security consideration is the negative impacts that will be caused for not adopting it.
### Conclusion
The proposed inactivity fee aims to enhance Bitcoin network security and activity by incentivizing regular transactions. Community feedback and further analysis are essential to refine this proposal and assess its potential impact on the network and users.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2024-08-02 12:31 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2024-08-01 21:55 [bitcoindev] HODL Tax Proposal Christian Riley
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2024-08-01 21:03 Richard Greaser
2024-08-01 21:59 ` José Edil Guimarães de Medeiros
2024-08-02 0:28 ` Keagan McClelland
2024-08-02 1:19 ` Jimmy Song
2024-08-02 2:03 ` George Burke
2024-08-02 5:08 ` 'hashnoncemessage' via Bitcoin Development Mailing List
2024-08-01 23:38 ` George Burke
2024-08-02 0:12 ` Keagan McClelland
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox