# Re: Flood attack 0.00000001 BC

Post by: satoshi on August 05, 2010, 04:03:21 PM

Forgot to add the good part about micropayments. &nbsp;While I don't think Bitcoin is practical for smaller micropayments right now, it will eventually be as storage and bandwidth costs continue to fall. &nbsp;If Bitcoin catches on on a big scale, it may already be the case by that time. &nbsp;Another way they can become more practical is if I implement client-only mode and the number of network nodes consolidates into a smaller number of professional server farms. &nbsp;Whatever size micropayments you need will eventually be practical. &nbsp;I think in 5 or 10 years, the bandwidth and storage will seem trivial.

I am not claiming that the network is impervious to DoS attack. &nbsp;I think most P2P networks can be DoS attacked in numerous ways. &nbsp;(On a side note, I read that the record companies would like to DoS all the file sharing networks, but they don't want to break the anti-hacking/anti-abuse laws.)

If we started getting DoS attacked with loads of wasted transactions back and forth, you would need to start paying a 0.01 minimum transaction fee. &nbsp;0.1.5 actually had an option to set that, but I took it out to reduce confusion. &nbsp;Free transactions are nice and we can keep it that way if people don't abuse them.

That brings up the question: if there was a minimum 0.01 fee for each transaction, should we automatically add the fee if it's just the minimum 0.01? &nbsp;It would be awfully annoying to ask each time. &nbsp;If you have 50.00 and send 10.00, the recipient would get 10.00 and you'd have 39.99 left. &nbsp;I think it should just add it automatically. &nbsp;It's trivial compared to the fees many other types of services add automatically.

Quote from: FreeMoney on August 04, 2010, 07:30:32 PM

> Does including more slow down your hashing rate?

No, not at all.

---

Source file: bitcoin-forum-satoshi-nakamoto.tgz

External link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=287.msg7687#msg7687
