Re: [bitcoin-dev] Regarding setting a lower minrelaytxfee

From: "aliashraf.btc At protonmail" <aliashraf.btc@protonmail•com>
To: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd•org>,
	Bitcoin Protocol Discussion
	<bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Regarding setting a lower minrelaytxfee
Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2022 13:19:05 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bKNhJ_ASFgsOslPnOxW-ps5h2OUbHbVQfOelaLPey8lxezLEuevkua1WpAtVRNPRmCtj0fRAeOSe5OHWYOSafczcBuGzhRDqbVjGctAUdBI=@protonmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YuerLzSvdJ8ZcqrR@petertodd.org>

> On Sat, Jul 30, 2022 at 05:24:35PM +0000, alicexbt via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> like a hashcash-based alternative broadcast scheme.
Hi Peter,
I've been mulling the idea of attaching work to low fee txns, both as a compensation (e.g., in a sidechain, or an alt), and/or as a spam proof. Unfortunately, both suffer from ASICs:
For spam proof case, the adversary can easily buy a used/obsolete device to produce lots of spam txns very cheaply, unless you put the bar very high, making it almost impossible for average users to even try.
The compensation scenario is pretty off-topic, still, interesting enough for 1 min read:
Wallets commit to the latest blockchain state in the transaction AND attach work.
It is considered contribution to the security (illegitimate chains can't include the txn), hence isrewarded by fee discount/exemption depending on the offset of the state they've committed to (the closer, the better) and the amount of work attached.
For this to work, block difficulty is calculated inclusive with the work embedded in the txns, it contains. Sophisticated and consequential, yet not infeasible per se.

Unfortunately, this scheme is hard to balance with ASICs in the scene too, for instance, you can't subsidize wallets for their work like with a leverge, because miners can easily do it locally, seizing the subsidies for themselves, long story, not relevant just ignore it.

Cheers, Ali

------- Original Message -------
On Monday, August 1st, 2022 at 3:00 PM, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> On Sat, Jul 30, 2022 at 05:24:35PM +0000, alicexbt via bitcoin-dev wrote:
>
> > However, I think developers should not make any changes in the default minimum fee rate required for relay. If there are incentives for users and miners to change it, they should use non-default value. In case, miners want to experiment with lower fee rate and see if this increases revenue they could try using it on odd dates (even dates remain default) for a month. We all could analyze how this worked for different mining pools and non-default value (lower or higher) could become normal in the future.
>
>
> Without a way for lower-fee-rate transactions to get to those miners,
> experiments like that are pointless.
>
> If you want to propose things like this, propose a way to get non-standard txs
> to miners, like a hashcash-based alternative broadcast scheme.
>
> --
> https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev