1 sat \ 0 replies \ @leaf OP 13 Apr \ parent \ on: Isn't utxo set growth a big issue? bitcoin_beginners
Cheers for the reply.
I'm amenable to the argument that technological improvements will save us, but at the same time I'd rather not trust in it - although given the trouble it seems anyone is having introducing any change, I'm inclined to think we have no choice.
That proposal makes sense to me - as a temporary measure until demand picks up. Fees will eventually be high, so that might as well be embraced now. But I appreciate that, in terms of onboarding, this reduces the number of people that will be able to get their own utxo before being priced out, and that the infrastructure for a high fee environment takes time to build.
I'd guess if it ever did become life-or-death, then the utxo set would be pruned. But like you, I don't see it ever becoming that bad. If there is an issue, maybe it's that it's not a problem that will cause shock, but will just slowly get worse with time, and so people will put up with it.
It's not my analysis, but while I was trying to answer this question I found this post: https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/a/115451
The post (with various assumptions) says 104 years until we reach the maximum amount of utxos that aren't dust.
I was hoping people already had an idea to combat this, but it seems there is no magic solution. I guess the takeaway here is that the problem is only annoying, as you said. And maybe some clever clogs will come up with something :)