Oddbean new post about login | logout They're low and always will be, even for the same number of bitcoin txs, because it has dynamic blocks that adjust to demand Bitcoin fees skyrocket with more use because people are bidding for limited blockspace If you're going to criticize Monero at least learn the valid criticisms against it
unless this trick is tested we dont know how it works, effectively fees have been ever low cause low usage. I'm a lot scheptical of this solution cause it meas validation cost become higher and higher and its basically in-built way to do cost-effective spam-attacks.
We just had a surge of transactions all of March where we saw it work in the wild. You should learn how dynamic blocks work. There are trade offs, but high fees with more usage isn't one of them. https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/monero-transactions.html#6m
That was the attack & theft of dnm by antidarknet
Yes, but my point was it showed dynamic blocks working
When an attacker decide to spam monero react not raising the fees; so the attacker has no incentive to stop, can make an optimal use of his resources spamming. This is really a bad way to solve the high-fees-fro-txs problem, more elegant then the bcash solution, but still in the same category of effectivness. Monero fees be low unless noone can do validation is not a victory.
Their incentive to stop is the same as Bitcoins. They're throwing money down the drain and don't have infinite money. You can argue they can't spam for as long on Bitcoin. In the same hypothetical situation Bitcoin fees would climb much faster and be much worse off and stay that way if it is sustained because it's blocksize doesnt adjust. Bcash has dynamic blocks now by the way. Last part depends on rate of adoption, protocol improvements, and consumer tech advances. Just like we can easily run a Monero node at the current rate of adoption no problem. Bitcoin just gains easier validation at expense of higher transaction fees - which just centralizes in a different way (no one will run a node for a network they can't afford to use) https://nostrcheck.me/media/af740d198babb8c7b82d0a4718eb354bb3f6af9a98639b85d4a5cf1371caba85/563fe6fae92d9f1459b7f4bc85978712a23a1b2c08bd389e681bad97f97a84e7.webp
The current rate of adoption of monero is a joke, I think it would react very bad if some adoption would come. Bitcoin fees are still low and offchain solution are the way someone should pay, the tech is pretty ready.
Because no one is using Bitcoin as much. We see every time there is even modest increase in use Bitcoin fees blast off. If you expect everyone to be paying super cheap fees offchain, then how is that different from Monero in that regard? Miners will be making much less money in fees because users are not paying higher onchain fees (isnt that Bitcoins security model for when block rewards vanish is higher fees?) Guess we'll have to wait and see what happens. https://nostrcheck.me/media/af740d198babb8c7b82d0a4718eb354bb3f6af9a98639b85d4a5cf1371caba85/9f76e4c0f830601c97c152d2b5336ab3a18630c758d0a4ae48b454c08199af30.webp
there could be possible, the problem is high validation costs for more usage, and is the reason we need to cap timechain writings to avoid spam DDOS. Solution to increase the tx-per-block need to resize txs like CISA or move tx offchain like lightning, putting just more txs of same size arbitrarly redefining and suppressing market for blockspace is spamming.
Yes, all fair and debatable points, but now you're moving on other topics when we were originally talking about fees growing with usage (which is not true with Monero)
but its also true that the reason of fees to be low is low usage, blockspace writing policies are obliquous to this fact, they mostly would have been low even with a hard cap like the bitcoin one (even if monero txs are individually larger).
"but its also true that the reason of fees to be low is low usage" Do you mean on Monero? This is not true, that's the whole reason for dynamic blocks in the first place. We even have real world examples of it in action very recently on Monero. But continue believing this if you like 🤷♂️
Its true unless someone has succesfully conducted spam attacks and bloated the utxo set instead of having fees spike. Its true what you say, but still after the attacker has been bored the usage has drastically lowered to a real-usage level.
If what you're saying is that a similar spam attack would bloat Monero faster than Bitcoin, then okay, that's true, but nothing to do with fees again. Different topic.
