BIP [104]: Replace Transaction Fees with Data, Discussion Draft 0.2.9

Hello,

Here we propose a long-term solution to replace mining rewards and transactions fees.

BIP [104] is currently a discussion draft only.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwEbhrQ4ELzBSXpoUjRkc01QUGc/view?usp=sharing

Views and feedback welcome.

Regards,

Ahmed

>"By increasing the size of blocks, transaction fees may not be available

to supplement mining revenue and so those who do not have access to cheap or free power to mine;"

why? wouldn't a bigger block size actually allow for more transactions per block, therefore more fees to be collected, and the cost spread out among many more users (thus still keeping tx fees low). If anything, wouldn't bigger blocksizes are needed to suplement the losses of coinbase rewards being halfed.

http://twitter.com/gubatron

On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 12:39 PM, Ahmed Zsales via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation•org> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> Here we propose a long-term solution to replace mining rewards and
> transactions fees.
>
> BIP [104] is currently a discussion draft only.
>
>
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwEbhrQ4ELzBSXpoUjRkc01QUGc/view?usp=sharing
>
> Views and feedback welcome.
>
> Regards,
>
> Ahmed
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation•org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
>

Did you self-assigned a bip number?

https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0001.mediawiki

Anyway, from your document:

"The existing (2015) Big Data analysis market is valued at around $125bn according to market

research firm IDC. As the Bitcoin block chain replaces existing payment systems and attracts

millions or hundreds of millions of users, the intrinsic value of the data in the block chain

will increase and be attractive to data analytics businesses and block chain start-ups."

Without even entering about details related to technical feasibility, do you realize that you are proposing Bitcoin to become the most orwellian money ever? That this is the opposite of what many proposals and designs like coinjoin try to achieve?

I think (hope?) that this idea doesn't have any chance of being accepted by the Bitcoin community.

so you want us to, (i) at the moment of payment decide wether to pay a tx fee, or to include some data about what the transaction is about... (ii) and (iii) are out of the question as you'd be forcing people to not have privacy, which is one of the main reasons people use bitcoin, just paying like cash.

then the rest goes down hill.

1. You want to add more data to a transaction, which would fill blocks even faster.

2. The data will be on the blockchain, why in hell would anybody pay the miners for it when you can just mine it yourself, or pay XYZ online service to give you the tools you mention, and why would XYZ company pay miners for the revenues of such service?

because... you want to change the Bitcoin license from MIT to something else?

I'm sorry. this is dead on arrival, very unrealistic. Perhaps this will work for some other coin where people accept all these orwellianism from the start.

If you think there's much debate about blocksize you've no idea how things would get at the mention of moving away from MIT into some sort of commercial license, that would indeed destroy Bitcoin from being adopted as it would enter into many many conflicts that would render it unusable by lots of organizations.

While Peter Todd's public mention on social media was likely meant to be disparaging, I'll take the contribution of adding 'data mining' to the title in future updates of the draft - thank you.

It might be ironic that he posted the remark on Twitter, where his message will be aggregated and sold by twitter to data miners.

Twitter made $48m last year from selling data to data miners, at a 95% growth rate on year-on-year basis. It has since spent $130m on buying a data mining business who specialise in understanding how to mine data in order to grow this part of their business. It is one of their more profitable sideshows.

On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 7:40 PM, Btc Drak <btcdrak@gmail•com> wrote:

> You didnt reply to the list, I had emailed you privately.
>
> On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 7:22 PM, Ahmed Zsales <ahmedzsales18@gmail•com>
> wrote:
> > @btc Drak, noted, thanks.
> >
> > 1. Updated - removed reference to self ascribed [104]
> >
> >
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwEbhrQ4ELzBX3hCekFRSUVySWs/view?usp=sharing
> >
> >
> > @Angel Leon
> >
> > 2. Privacy issues are clearly covered.
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 6:48 PM, Btc Drak <btcdrak@gmail•com> wrote:
> >>
> >> You cannot assign your own bip numbers. You have to use the form
> >> BIP-myproposal
> >>
> >> On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 5:39 PM, Ahmed Zsales via bitcoin-dev
> >> <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation•org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hello,
> >>>
> >>> Here we propose a long-term solution to replace mining rewards and
> >>> transactions fees.
> >>>
> >>> BIP [104] is currently a discussion draft only.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwEbhrQ4ELzBSXpoUjRkc01QUGc/view?usp=sharing
> >>>
> >>> Views and feedback welcome.
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>>
> >>> Ahmed
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> >>> bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation•org
> >>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
> >>>
> >>
> >
>