Like killing Hitler . <| sep |> hold my plotforce <| sep |> It isn ' t maliciousAre you sure about that ? <| sep |> wow , how did you make a table in the comment ? <| sep |> Scamming how exactly ? We both know you don ' t have jack shit . <| sep |> Well it didn ' t . Don ' t you remember the stike of 2004 . The season ended after the ALDS <| sep |> bytes becomes meaningless in the system . Are you honestly saying that the amount of bytes has no meaning in the new system ? No meaning ? No meaning in terms of disk space requirements for archival nodes , effect on cost to run a full node , verification time , RAM usage , etcetcetcetc ? It has no meaning your words , not mine in the fee calculation , which clearly makes the fee calculation a piss poor reflection of system costs . You might as well complain that doesn ' t prioritize a transaction with 800 one bits set over one with only 700 one bits set . What a stupid thing to say . The number of 1 bits set affects nothing of what I ' ve mentioned above except perhaps compressibility , but with a very loose correlation , so unlike the size of the transaction it actually is irrelevant to the fee calculation . You still never addressed my other points , which are that you have 0 proof that this formula better addresses real network costs than the old formula based exclusively on tx size .