14 Mar 2019 #Ethereum
Sometimes a single Tweet can sparkle a heated discussion that can even make a news headline. That’s exactly what happened when Vitalik Buterin, one of the founding fathers of Ethereum platform, published, what seemed to him, a reasonable suggestion that the developers of Ethereum wallets should impose an additional fee in the amount of 1 gwei for each transaction that is carried out by the virtue of the wallet. He argued that this rather insignificant fee would be immensely beneficial for the developers' community to the extent that it would make it self-sufficient thus relieving from the dependency on the direct funding from the Ethereum Foundation. Although this proposal would make a logical sense from Buterin’s point of view, it was met with quite a ferocious opposition from the community of users as well as from some developers of the Ethereum wallets. Changpeng Zhao also didn’t squander the opportunity to give his two cents on the matter.
In his semi-scandalous Tweet, Buterin hinted that he is inclined to initiate amendments to the Ethereum protocol that would facilitate the implementation of fees which would translate into the increase of gas cost for the average Ethereum user by as much as 7%.
Just a quick reminder, gwei or nanoehter, in the denomination of the native coin (ETH), with one Ether being equal to a billion gwei. The cost of gas, another unit of the Ethereum network that refers to the cost of computation capacities required to perform a transaction or to execute a smart contract, is calculated in gwei.
The bigger is the transaction, or the more complex is the smart contract, the more gas volume it would require to be executed properly. The cost of gas per transaction is, basically, the amount of gwei that the user would have to compensate to the network for the expended computation power.
Currently, the developers of the Ethereum wallets are presumably being given a free hand with regard to charging fees whilst some dApp users have been figuring out the ways to avoid paying gas for transactions.
Buterin suggests that each ETH wallet should begin charging the fee of one gwei per transaction thus preventing users from evading the payment and opening the window of opportunity for the developers to become self-funded. Apparently,1 gwei should be a flat fee for any transaction irrespective of its volume. Granted that the price of 73 thousand gwei is about $0.01, the proposed fee appears to be a miserly sum. However, according to Vitalik’s calculations, it would amount to as much as $2 million per year. This money would be used to financially maintain the developers of Ethereum wallets thereby freeing from the necessity to compete for the grants from the Ethereum Foundation.
As one could expect, Vitalik’s followers didn’t greet his proposal with enthusiasm, which is quite understandable because it is inherent to human mentality to be dissatisfied when forced to pay for something that is seemingly free. However, they were right to mention the instance when MultiBit, a desktop Bitcoin wallet, tried to impose a similar fee, backing it up with a similar argumentation, but to no avail. Some users even joked that soon the Ethereum network would be used by governments to collect VAT. Even Changpeng Zhao, the CEO of Binance, got involved in the discussion by posting a succinct Tweet that said, “Don’t think this will fly.”
Get cryptocurrency price predictions, forecasts with analysis and news right to your inbox.
© 2015-2021 Crypto-Rating.com
The usage of this website constitutes acceptance of the following legal information. Any contracts of financial instruments offered to conclude bear high risks and may result in the full loss of the deposited funds. Prior to making transactions one should get acquainted with the risks to which they relate. All the information featured on the website, including information about the cryptocurrencies and bitcoin is intended solely for informational purposes, is not a means of advertising them, and doesn't imply direct instructions for investing. Crypto Rating shall not be liable for any loss, including unlimited loss of funds, which may arise directly or indirectly from the usage of this information. The editorial staff of the website does not bear any responsibility whatsoever for the content of the comments or reviews made by the site users about cryptocurrencies. The entire responsibility for the contents rests with the authors. Reprint of the materials is available only with the permission of the editorial staff.