Bitcoin was still young in 2015 when Rizun presented this paper, and it had a great impression on me. If you like formal economic arguments and aren't afraid of a little math, go have a read: https://t.co/FuYkrdGP8T Today it turns 10 🎉 / 🧵

The paper is a formal economic proposition built from the very foundation of supply and demand equations, working its way towards optimal miner decisions. Lo and behold, a "healthy fee market" exists without a blocksize limit.

Building on the back of this simple observation, @PeterRizun showed in his paper that in the absence of a blocksize limit, yes!, there would still be a fee market.

Yet there *is* a cost to a miner including a marginal transaction: the bigger block you broadcast, the greater the risk another miner wins the reward! A simple idea from Gavin Andresen in 2013: https://t.co/Wi2NEjBB4Z

Thus (still wrong!), the effect of blocksize limits as voiced by a miner (who else?), was that they create fee markets and, oh, high fees are a good thing. No blocksize limit → no fee market! (Bitfury, 2015) https://t.co/EryhZAb7hD

A common (but wrong!) premise for an argument against raising the blocksize limit: As long as miners can include zero-to-low fee transactions, then miners will do so *without end* (Houy, 2014 https://t.co/hFS5yZqPAN)

By the end of 2014, Bitcoin blocks were almost halfway to that 1MB limit. Satoshi had disappeared, and sadly so did Hal Finney. (source of chart: https://t.co/L1sLDLKr5B)

In 2010, Hal Finney, Satoshi and others imposed a 1MB blocksize limit to prevent DDOS attacks. The limit was meant to be temporary.

Today is the tenth anniversary of the paper "A Transaction Fee Market Exists Without a Block Size Limit" by @PeterRizun published on Aug 4, 2015. https://t.co/FuYkrdGP8T I have referred to it as the second-most important paper in Bitcoin history. A small thread 🧵:

BCH is already preparing/prepared for quantum computing. Maybe you're using the wrong Bitcoin? See @bitjson for an in-depth analysis.

Thanks to @BobMurphyEcon who always removes uneasiness and @ErikVoorhees for the free books. Spread the word, donate in crypto, friends

Want to help educate others about Austrian Economics, liberty, Mises and Rothbard? You can now donate BCH directly to the cause! https://t.co/E8sxZeqmJ9 @mises

On inauguration day, here's a lovely letter from Lysander Spooner to Grover Cleveland on the absurdity of government. 🏴

Can Americans switch to the metric system before we go to Mars @elonmusk?

Here are the coins I predict will do best in 2025, chosen from the Dec 31, 2024 CoinGecko Top 30 table (included below). 1) USDC 2) USDT 3) DAI 4) BCH 5) PEPE What are your picks?

Here's how I will score a portfolio. Rank 1 will get 5x weighting, rank 2 will get 4x weighting, ..., rank 5 will get 1x weighting. There are 17M different possible portfolios. Will you be able to land in the top 25th percentile?

It's time to pick the coins from the Top 30 which will do best in 2025! 🔝 3️⃣ 0️⃣ See if your portfolio will beat mine! Comment at the end of the thread and I'll tell you how you finished this time next year.

Only 3 percent of all possible ranked portfolios finished with a negative return. This means that you were likely a market genius in 2024. Clever you! In my next thread, I'll lay out my five picks for 2025. You should try to beat my picks! Half of you would have in 2024!

My portfolio was BCH, BTC, USDC, USDT, ETH. This portfolio returned 60% despite having two stablecoins, and it barely finished in the top 50th percentile. 😅

So, given my simple weighting, the best possible portfolio was DOGE, XRP, XLM, TON and TRX (in that order) which returned 207% 🎄 . The worst possible porftolio was OP, MATIC, ATOM, DOT, AVAX (in that order) which returned -44% 🤢.