You need to make simd’s small and simple and focus on one problem only. Sgp-3 isn’t perfect, and at 1/10 lamport, it fixes a real problem.
Right now the signature fee is a static fixed cost on all txs. It is amortized better for larger txs. So per cu pricing is actually worse for small txs than it should be. A 5k-CU transaction pays ~280× as much base fee per CU as a 1.4M-CU transaction.
1 simple simd: change the signature fee to a CU scaled one
2nd simd: figure out how to price the fee. Is it a stake weighted vote? Is it a controller based on the average priority fee over an epoch?
You need a supermajority to make a governance change, every additional problem that is rolled into a single proposal bisects the set of supporters. It’s intersection of supporters vs the union of the detractors.
Right now the signature fee is a static fixed cost on all txs. It is amortized better for larger txs. So per cu pricing is actually worse for small txs than it should be. A 5k-CU transaction pays ~280× as much base fee per CU as a 1.4M-CU transaction.
1 simple simd: change the signature fee to a CU scaled one
2nd simd: figure out how to price the fee. Is it a stake weighted vote? Is it a controller based on the average priority fee over an epoch?
You need a supermajority to make a governance change, every additional problem that is rolled into a single proposal bisects the set of supporters. It’s intersection of supporters vs the union of the detractors.