We are adding transaction fees to the protocol. The time of anonymous but free payments will have to end. I wish there was a better option but there isn't afaik.
Then, mint operators can earn fees.
Discussion
Fees are fine it's capitalism. If a lot of mints are used they anyhow tend to go to very low amounts.
Bingo. Use the free market for what it is good at: driving service costs down in a competitive environment.
noob question: can't mints just issue less ecash than the sats they receive?
I think it's a good idea to stimulate the system.
You might consider adding fees only at the time of tokenizing when creating and deleting Ecash from a mint or transfer between mints. Keeping transactions Ecash free of fees in a same mint protocol.
This sounds like adding artificial friction into the system. from a technical perspective exchanging tokens is just swapping blinded signatures, which shouldn't be that hard.
I agree that the expectation that the mints will hold your sats forever without a fee is unrealistic. but couldn't having an explicit expiration date on tokens solve this?
I haven't thought about it that much though... so I'm missing something
Friction is exactly what this is supposed to achieve.
This is the way.
Could also be storage fees instead of transaction fees ?
I guess the only time to charge is during a send (answered my own question)
If you arenβt paying for your nutz π₯Your nutz π are paying for you.
You get itβ¦
fees should be % based still allow smaller amounts of payload. most important is mints should be fully tested n production when charging. remove PoC TestOnly banner take responsibility for any outage or mixup