Well, all the currently proposed volume-based fees are strictly greater than the space-based fee because they are charged per output and no output is >1KB. I’m proposing we charge the volume based fee for each individual non-change output and the space based fee if any change outputs are present. A chunking event is a transaction where every output is a change output. A change output is determined by whether or not the output volume for an address (sum of all outputs for the address) is less than the input volume for that address, and the input volume for that address is non-zero (i.e. that address signed the Txn).
A change address when not in avatar mode is of course treated as a non-change address.
Also, the chunking should be a fibonnacci chunking.
Dividing a 100 NBT output would take 0.2 KB for the input +0.04/output across 9 outputs so the whole transaction would be under 1 KB and would cost just the minimum change fee (0.01 NBT). Then, buying that 25 NBT cab ride we would use the 1,3, and 21 NBT outputs again remaining under 1 KB and paying just the volume-based fee on the 25 NBT (0.095 NBT).
Doing this in avatar mode would entail paying the volume-based fee on the 25 NBT and then 0.01 NBT additionally for the space (up to 1 KB) because of the change output. The result is actually that you end up paying the same as without avatar mode because either you are paying for a chunking event or change. Of course, you could also chunk your change output into fibonacci chunks, thus filling up the rest of the 1 KB that you bought and avoiding having to pay the space fee on the next transaction (Txns where all outputs are unique from all inputs do not have to pay the space fee because the volume fee is more than that anyway).
The underlying premise here relies on the concept that all inputs are signed and thus if an output goes to the same address as an input but with less volume, it is by definition a change address (in avatar mode).
Funding is an essential part of any venture - I was just watching Vitalik’s last video interview on Ethereum and he mentioned they created the foundation essentially to manage funds to keep asking for more money to finance their research - He alluded to the fact that new ETH sales could be repeated in the future and he was even open to donations.
Do you have already concrete plan on how and when you will get more funding?
Do shareholders have any strict methodology on how and when to get more funding?
Hey, I’m having problems with blocks like this: http://blockexplorer.nu/blocks/258477/1
Is this a burn event, or what is this? Someone paid 57 kNBT in fees.
If someone could please look at this breakdown and verify that there are no obvious errors in calculation, I will proceed with the burn of 57199.5803 NBT to this address: BMdEGVo9oSmsFHDKiL39CYhaSD3AmCv4s4
We should increase the fee by an order of magnitude to become 0.02%. The B&C fee is too high for Nu, but what we have now is just giving away blockchain space.
Can we get a website or a client update with displayed Tx fee votes?
The current transaction fee can be displayed by selecting Help…Debug window and then typing getinfo in the Debug window. It looks like this:
“paytxfee” : 0.01,
There isn’t an RPC to get transaction fee votes. I propose including a getfeevotes RPC that takes a block height and block quantity as optional parameters. I would like to have that in the next release. I expect the 2.1 release to have few features so we should have it relatively soon.
The NBT transaction fee is still being voted for at 0.01 NBT. Those of you who are still voting for this amount, what is your rationale? Why not 0.02 NBT, 0.05 NBT, 0.10 NBT, or 0.99 NBT? At 0.01 NBT we are not yet properly transferring the costs of doing business onto NuBits users.
Mh. Analysing httpd logs?
It’s http traffic after all, but I’m not sure the two can analyse such things on github, which is hosting their data feed files.
Actually, there is a way to track this. If each data feed provider inputted a unique motion hash into their voting (such as 0B5AB73448AFDF1080598ED9A083DF4EE94925F2 for “This is Cybnate’s data feed.”) we could track in real time the level of support each data feed provider has. This motion hash would be unique to an individual data feed provider. This approach would guard against voter centralization because the network would be aware when a particular data feed provider is being used by too many users on the network.
I could argue 5x is a big increase and most exchanges have set at around 0.1 nbt withdrawal fee. 0.02 would hardly be noticed and would double our fee income.
I have no detailed information about NBT are used at the moment.
Looking at the volume at exchanges I need to assume that hedging (BTC) volatility is still a major part.
Further I assume that there are not only little amounts of NBT per person used for the hedging.
For moving dozens or hundreds (or thousands?) of NBT from exchange to exchange to arbitrage it plays little role whether the fee is 0.01 NBT per kB or 0.05 or 0.1 or 1.
It would be very helpful to have an option at the [blockexplorer][1] that lists transactions in a selected time frame with options to sort it, showing the accumulated NBT fee and the average fee per transacted NBT volume.
Lacking this information I can only suppose the current user profile is moving big volumes of NBT. HEre are some examples. I just scrolled down in the blockexplorer through transactions of the last 24 hours and picked transactions:
This list of NBT transactions in the last 24 hours isn’t complete, but close to it (except for the hourly 21/22 NBT transactions).
From what I gather from it I had no trouble suggesting a fee of 0.1 to 1 NBT per kB.
It wouldn’t hurt when moving big amounts, which seems to be the major use case (at least in the last day).
I have no idea (and forgive me that I’m too lazy to do that manually and too unskilled to automate it) how it looks in the last 7 days, last 30 days, whatever time frame.
**hint, hint **
It would be very helpful to have an option at the [blockexplorer][1] that lists transactions in a selected time frame with options to sort it, showing the accumulated NBT fee and the average fee per transacted NBT volume.
[1]: https://blockexplorer.nu
