[Bitcoin-ml] Transaction mining priorities.

Tom Zander tomz at freedommail.ch
Thu Sep 21 09:32:42 UTC 2017


On Thursday, 21 September 2017 11:13:52 CEST Tomas via bitcoin-ml wrote:
> The term priority is used in this thread but it isn't really relevant if
> blocks aren't full, and I believe we will raise the blocksize in time to
> prevent it from ever happening.

That would be nice, but that idea is not realistic.
If this were the case then the “backup my harddrive to the blockchain” 
scenarios would become reality, and that just doesn’t make any sense.

Remember, with the large number of ABC nodes on the Cash network, we can’t 
relay and mine zero-fee transactions. But we used to have such transactions 
and we want to get back to that.

As such we need a bit of blocksize pressure, to avoid people coming to the 
conclusion that they can use the Bitcoin Cash chain for everything they 
want. Remember that huge thread about DNS entries on the blockchain and 
Satoshi stating that the blockchain is a generic database for all things.
He was right, and we must keep that warning in mind.

The priorities in the OP mail are relevant to avoid such a set up from being 
easy to spam and denying service to normal customers.
-- 
Tom Zander
Blog: https://zander.github.io
Vlog: https://vimeo.com/channels/tomscryptochannel


More information about the bitcoin-ml mailing list