|
Title: How will version .9 do away with hardcoded transaction fees? Post by: minerva on January 03, 2014, 12:08:27 AM How will version .9 do away with hardcoded transaction fees?
Title: Re: How will version .9 do away with hardcoded transaction fees? Post by: justusranvier on January 03, 2014, 12:22:57 AM https://bitcoinfoundation.org/blog/?p=290
Title: Re: How will version .9 do away with hardcoded transaction fees? Post by: theymos on January 03, 2014, 06:29:15 AM It likely won't.
I think that the long-term solution will have to be allowing transactions to be cancelled and resent with a higher fee. Hardcoded fees fall out of date (and aren't free-market), but I think that it'll always be possible for miners to trick automatic fee calculators into paying more than necessary. So it should be left mostly up to the users to figure out an appropriate fee with trial and error. Transaction cancellation is extremely difficult to add to Bitcoin-Qt, though, so this probably won't happen in 0.9. I don't think that Gavin's fee calculator will be included, either. Fees will probably remain hardcoded for now. Title: Re: How will version .9 do away with hardcoded transaction fees? Post by: Sukrim on January 03, 2014, 12:41:09 PM I'd rather see "no fee" defaults and then allowing to attach fees to transactions to allow for something like an auction where you bid higher and higher until you get included in a block.
Title: Re: How will version .9 do away with hardcoded transaction fees? Post by: minerva on January 03, 2014, 11:37:33 PM It likely won't. In an ideal free-market, nodes can block propagation of blocks that would push fees too high, bankrupting the unscrupulous miner.I think that the long-term solution will have to be allowing transactions to be cancelled and resent with a higher fee. Hardcoded fees fall out of date (and aren't free-market), but I think that it'll always be possible for miners to trick automatic fee calculators into paying more than necessary. So it should be left mostly up to the users to figure out an appropriate fee with trial and error. Transaction cancellation is extremely difficult to add to Bitcoin-Qt, though, so this probably won't happen in 0.9. I don't think that Gavin's fee calculator will be included, either. Fees will probably remain hardcoded for now. Title: Re: How will version .9 do away with hardcoded transaction fees? Post by: t3a on January 04, 2014, 12:21:46 AM It likely won't. In an ideal free-market, nodes can block propagation of blocks that would push fees too high, bankrupting the unscrupulous miner.I think that the long-term solution will have to be allowing transactions to be cancelled and resent with a higher fee. Hardcoded fees fall out of date (and aren't free-market), but I think that it'll always be possible for miners to trick automatic fee calculators into paying more than necessary. So it should be left mostly up to the users to figure out an appropriate fee with trial and error. Transaction cancellation is extremely difficult to add to Bitcoin-Qt, though, so this probably won't happen in 0.9. I don't think that Gavin's fee calculator will be included, either. Fees will probably remain hardcoded for now. Title: Re: How will version .9 do away with hardcoded transaction fees? Post by: minerva on January 04, 2014, 12:23:22 AM It likely won't. In an ideal free-market, nodes can block propagation of blocks that would push fees too high, bankrupting the unscrupulous miner.I think that the long-term solution will have to be allowing transactions to be cancelled and resent with a higher fee. Hardcoded fees fall out of date (and aren't free-market), but I think that it'll always be possible for miners to trick automatic fee calculators into paying more than necessary. So it should be left mostly up to the users to figure out an appropriate fee with trial and error. Transaction cancellation is extremely difficult to add to Bitcoin-Qt, though, so this probably won't happen in 0.9. I don't think that Gavin's fee calculator will be included, either. Fees will probably remain hardcoded for now. |