<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
I think potential fee subsidies for cleaning up UTXO (and/or
penalties for creating more UTXO than you burn) are worth thinking
about. As Gavin's post ( gavinandresen.ninja/utxo-uhoh ) indicates,
UTXO cost is far higher than block storage, so charging differently
for the in/out mismatches should make good economic sense.<br>
<br>
Ross<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 09/05/2015 20:16, Jim Phillips
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CANe1mWzLcmqRMJHsJvATTjyJ9fEdCDb-J0KAQhardVj3Jni6ww@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, May 9, 2015 at 2:06 PM,
Pieter Wuille <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:pieter.wuille@gmail.com" target="_blank">pieter.wuille@gmail.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<p dir="ltr">It's a very complex trade-off, which is hard
to optimize for all use cases. Using more UTXOs requires
larger transactions, and thus more fees in general. </p>
</blockquote>
<div>Unless the miner determines that the reduction in UTXO
storage requirements is worth the lower fee. There's no
protocol level enforcement of a fee as far as I understand
it. It's enforced by the miners and their willingness to
include a transaction in a block.<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<p dir="ltr">In addition, it results in more linkage
between coins/addresses used, so lower privacy. </p>
</blockquote>
<div>Not if you only select all the UTXOs from a single
address. A wallet that is geared more towards privacy
minded individuals may want to reduce the amount of
address linkage, but a wallet geared towards the general
masses probably won't have to worry so much about that. <br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<p dir="ltr">The only way you can guarantee an economical
reason to keep the UTXO set small is by actually having
a consensus rule that punishes increasing its size.</p>
</blockquote>
<div>There's an economical reason right now to keeping the
UTXO set small. The smaller it is, the easier it is for
the individual to run a full node. The easier it is to run
a full node, the faster Bitcoin will spread to the masses.
The faster it spreads to the masses, the more valuable it
becomes.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud
Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications
Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights
Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight.
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y">http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y</a></pre>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
Bitcoin-development mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net">Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development">https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>