Proposals to improve network resources model

[sean-liu55]

Simple Summary

This issue proposes several new schemes to try to solve the problem of the low utilization rate of network frozen resources, reduce user usage costs, and improve resource models. Including the following two ideas, these two ideas are independent of each other.

1. Freezing TRX should only get bandwidth, energy, or voting rights;
2. Freezing does not obtain bandwidth or energy, but it can be used to vote and share network transaction fees.

Background

Executing transactions on the TRON network requires resources, including bandwidth and energy. Bandwidth consumption is the number of bytes of the transaction, and energy is the consumption of the virtual machine TVM execution.

At present, there are two ways to obtain resources. One is to directly consume TRX. In each transaction, resources are purchased from the network at a fixed price, such as 1 energy 40 SUN. Another way is to freeze TRX to obtain resources, and the amount of resources obtained is calculated based on the total frozen amount of the entire network.

Motivation

Currently, freezing TRX can obtain bandwidth or energy, while obtaining voting rights. Many accounts freeze a large amount of TRX for voting only but do not use resources. This results in accounts that really need resources only get a small part of resources and network resources are wasted.

Resource usage data

At present, the total daily free energy is 90,000,000,000,and the total daily free bandwidth is 43,200,000,000.
Take the data of January 2, 2021, as an example, the total energy consumption of the whole network: 70,689,454,314 ENERGY, Top100 contracts energy consumption: 63,876,706,454 ENERGY (where the energy obtained by the user freezing TRX is 3,279,215,389 ENERGY, The energy of users burning TRX is 53,770,824,593 ENERGY). Only about 5.1% of the energy is obtained by freezing, and about 6.9% of free energy is used.

The bandwidth situation is similar. The total bandwidth consumption of the whole network: 491,172,880 BANDWIDTH, Top10 contracts bandwidth consumption: 244,162,039 BANDWIDTH (where the bandwidth obtained by the user freezing TRX is 3,982,607 BANDWIDTH, The bandwidth of users burning TRX is 240,179,432 BANDWIDTH). Only about 1.6% of the bandwidth is obtained by freezing.

The current price of energy is 0.00004 TRX. If the network can double the usage of free energy,
it can save 1,950,878,306 * 0.00004 * 0.03 = 2341 USD fee in one day. If it can convert half of the burned energy into Free energy, it can save 32,524,509,065/2 * 0.00004 * 0.03 = 19514 USD fee.

Profit present condition:

Here is a brief calculation of the profit that users can obtain by freezing TRX. Users can choose to freeze to obtain bandwidth or energy, these can be converted into actual value based on price. In addition, both of which can obtain voting rights, and voting for SR will obtain voting income.

Bandwidth profit
Assuming to freeze 10,000 TRX, the entire network freezes 30 billion TRX, of which bandwidth accounts for 90%,
30 billion * 0.9 = 27 billion.
Obtained bandwidth 10000 * 43,200,000,000 / 27,000,000,000=16000 BANDWIDTH.
1 Bandwidth cost 0.00004 TRX, 1trx = 0.03 USD.
The corresponding profit is 16000 * 0.00004 * 0.03=0.0192 USD.

Energy profit
The energy calculation process is similar.
Assuming that 10,000 TRX is frozen, 30 billion TRX is frozen in total, of which energy accounts for 10%, 30billion*0.1=3 billion,
Energy gained 10000 * 90,000,000,000 / 3,000,000,000 = 300000 ENERGY.
1 Energy cost 0.00004 TRX, 1trx = 0.03 USD.
The corresponding profit is 300000 * 0.00004 * 0.03 = 0.36 USD.

Vote profit
Currently, the total voting reward for each block is 160 TRX, the total number of votes is approximately 30 billion TRX, and the default reward distribution ratio, 80% is given to voters, and 20% is given to SR.
Assuming that the user freezes 10,000 TRX and votes, the profit obtained in one day is approximate:
10000/30,000,000,000 * 160 * 80% * 24 * 3600/3=1.2288TRX.
The current price of TRX is about $0.03.
So, the corresponding profit is 1.2288 * 0.03 = 0.0368USD.

To summarize, if the user freezes 10,000 TRX to obtain bandwidth, then the total revenue for a day includes bandwidth revenue and voting revenue. The income is approximately 0.0192 +0.0368 = 0.056USD. If the user freezes to obtain energy, the income is approximately 0.36 + 0.0368= 0.3968USD.

Freezing TRX get only bandwidth, energy, or voting rights

At present, the total amount of network freezing is 30 billion, of which about 90% are frozen for bandwidth and 10% for energy. If the network uses this solution, voting accounts will no longer occupy the frozen resources of the network, and ordinary users will get more resources. The main difficulty in adopting this scheme is how to deal with accounts that have been frozen to obtain resources and have voted.

Optional solutions

For the stability of the network, the vote for SR should not be changed, so the question is whether the resources obtained by the account should be retained.

1. Reserve resources, reserve SR's vote, not reserve voting rights
   The resources that the user has obtained can continue to be used, and the vote for the SR will not change, but the vote that has already occurred cannot be modified. In addition, a new system contract that freezes voting rights is added. If the account initiates a vote, the new voting value must be larger than the size of the voting rights that are frozen.
   This solution has good compatibility, and neither ordinary users nor developers need to make major changes.

2. Not reserve resources, reserve SR's vote, not reserve voting rights
   The resources obtained by freezing in the past can no longer be used. In terms of the specific implementation, new fields will need to be added to the account data to distinguish the resources obtained by freezing in the past. This solution can solve the problem of obtaining voting rights but not releasing resources in solution 1.

Profit calculation

For newly frozen accounts, only bandwidth, energy, or voting rights will be available at this time. From the profit calculation process in the previous section, it can be known that by freezing 10,000 TRX and obtaining bandwidth, the profit for one day is about 0.0192 USD. Freezing to obtain energy, the income is about 0.36 USD. And freezing to get votes, the income is about 0.0368USD.

Freezing TRX to get transaction fees and voting rights

At present, the utilization rate of the resources obtained by the current freezing is low. If the freezing TRX no longer obtains the resources, all transactions will directly consume TRX, and the consumed TRX will be stored in the public fee pool and shared by all frozen accounts and the SR.

For accounts that consume TRX to initiate transactions, there is no difference in this scheme. For voting-only accounts, these accounts will receive an additional benefit. As for the accounts freezing the resources, there are some changes. The accounts can still freeze TRX, obtain the network's transaction fees, and use the profit to execute transactions.
Here is a brief calculation.

Profit calculation

Assuming that 10,000 TRX is frozen, the total frozen amount is the same as the current 30 billion,
the daily transaction fee is about 75000 USD(January 4, 2021), and according to the allocation ratio of 80% to voters and 20% to SR.
The cost obtained is 10000 / 30000000000 * 75000 * 80% = 0.02 USD.
In addition to the voting rewards of 0.0368USD that users can obtain as mentioned in the previous section,
The total profit is 0.0368+0.02=0.0568 USD.

Comparison

Both of these two new schemes can solve the problem of low usage of frozen resources and improve resource models. In the first scheme, only accounts that need to use resources will freeze TRX for resources. In the second scheme, the freezing of the acquired resources is directly canceled.

Compare the profit of these two schemes. In the first scheme, freezing 10,000 TRX and obtaining bandwidth, the profit for one day is about 0.0192 USD. Freezing to obtain energy, the income is about 0.36 USD. And freezing to get votes, the income is about 0.0368USD. In the second scheme, users can obtain 0.0568 USD by freezing to get votes and the transaction fee. It seems that the profit obtained by freezing the obtained energy is higher, but other factors also need to consider, including the actual utilization of resources is only 5%, the increase in transaction fees caused by the increase in future transaction volume, and the stability of transaction fee income.

[joker-gdb]

Wow, I hope to see such a change～

[Omo-Coc]

This is very necessary. The two main voters of binance accounted for 90%, they obtained 29,220,187,313 energy and 15848341492 bandwidth, but they never saw the use,that is too wasteful.

[a49688448]

Totally agree!
It costs less when develop dapps on TRON.

[Vita-Diva]

good job. Tron has increased energy cost 3 times more than before. As dapp devs have to freeze trx for resources, I should this is a good move to reduce our cost.

[dkealervdsf]

I can not agree with this change more！

[Omo-Coc]

How to deal with people who have already voted， obtained BP and voting rights?

[kunlunxuejue11]

How to deal with people who have already voted， obtained BP and voting rights?

I think should reserve the right to vote by default and cancel other resources to ensure the stability of the SR ranking, otherwise it will cause network instability

[sean-liu55]

How to deal with people who have already voted， obtained BP and voting rights?

I think we should reserve the right to vote by default and cancel other resources to ensure the stability of the SR ranking, otherwise it will cause network instability

Agree with your idea about voting rights. Voting rights should be retained to ensure network stability.
The resources that have been obtained should be canceled, but it is very difficult to implement, which requires modifying the data of all accounts. Currently, there are about 20 million accounts.
A compromise solution can be adopted. The resources and voting rights that have been frozen are retained at the same time, but the voting cannot be modified unless the voting rights are obtained by a new freeze.

[liankuaiZyumingfit]

It is indeed a good thing. In this way, there are relatively few people who vote, and those who focus on voting can get a higher rate of return. For them, putting energy there is also a loss

[joker-gdb]

As a developer, I hope this can be achieved sooner

[otakuinny]

Putting aside the enormous amount of changes that'll have to be made both in Java tron and in a lot dapps, I'm not sure making people choose between obtaining resources and getting voting rights is such a great idea. This'll take votes away from community SRs as a lot of their current voters might opt for resources. There are very few community SRs in the top 27 and they need all the help/funding they can get.

If the issue is that people are not using the resources they obtained from freezing, an easier solution would be to make it possible to vote without freezing. Currently, we can change who we vote for any number of times and at any time. I'm not sure why freezing is even a requirement to vote in the first place. If there is no freeze requirement to vote, people will not bother to freeze unless it's absolutely necessary.

Problem solved!

[sean-liu55]

@otakuinny, Unlocking, and allowing arbitrary voting may lead to network insecurity. Consider a scenario. Before the network counts vote and selects the first 27 SRs, users obtain a large amount of TRX from the exchange and vote, and then after counting, Immediately cancel voting and sell TRX.

[otakuinny]

@sean-liu55, that can easily be solved by a shorter freeze duration, like a minimum of 1 day freeze duration for voting. So, if you want to just vote, you gotta freeze for atleast 1 day and if you want to vote and get resources, you freeze for atleast 3 days (just like now).

Ideally, we want to strike a compromise that everybody is happy with and that doesn't radically change the eco-system that everybody is so used to.

[renchenchang]

@sean-liu55, that can easily be solved by a shorter freeze duration, like a minimum of 1 day freeze duration for voting. So, if you want to just vote, you gotta freeze for atleast 1 day and if you want to vote and get resources, you freeze for atleast 3 days (just like now).

Ideally, we want to strike a compromise that everybody is happy with and that doesn't radically change the eco-system that everybody is so used to.

This solution can not overcome waste of energy

[otakuinny]

@renchenchang, why wouldn't it? Let's be clear about what the actual issue is here. The issue is people freezing their TRX just to vote and not using any of the resources that they get from freezing. The solution is to provide a way to vote without getting resources while simultaneously also keeping the existing system of obtaining resources and voting power. Now people who want to vote can just vote.

If you say that some people might still choose to vote and get resources and not use them, then so be it. They might do that even with the new proposed system. With all the alts just rising, there's already little incentive for people to stay in TRON. Making them choose between obtaining resources and receiving voting rewards will just make it worse and drive people away.

With the big increase in energy price, people want to gain energy so they are not paying exorbitant txn fees, but at the same time, also receiving voter rewards keeps them engaged. Bottom line, there was a reason why freezing TRX allowed for both resources and voting power in the first place and if resource hogging is an issue, we should look into ways that do not change the model that we are so accustomed to.

[woaichixigua07]

I support option one(Freezing TRX should only get bandwidth, energy, or voting rights
), because this option can free up idle resources and bring us developers more cheap energy, and it is also the easiest to use. However, the second option does not see any advantages, just make simple things become more complicated.

[otakuinny]

Both option 1 and option 2 will decrease the profitability for TRON users.

Either give the option to vote with a smaller freeze duration or just increase the total amount of energy in the network. This issue can be fixed so easily without making big changes that are going to hurt everybody.

[Omo-Coc]

Putting aside the enormous amount of changes that'll have to be made both in Java tron and in a lot dapps, I'm not sure making people choose between obtaining resources and getting voting rights is such a great idea. This'll take votes away from community SRs as a lot of their current voters might opt for resources. There are very few community SRs in the top 27 and they need all the help/funding they can get.

If the issue is that people are not using the resources they obtained from freezing, an easier solution would be to make it possible to vote without freezing. Currently, we can change who we vote for any number of times and at any time. I'm not sure why freezing is even a requirement to vote in the first place. If there is no freeze requirement to vote, people will not bother to freeze unless it's absolutely necessary.

Problem solved!

How to vote without freezing, can you vote if you hold trx? What if trx is transferred? I think this is very difficult to implement

[sean-liu55]

@renchenchang, why wouldn't it? Let's be clear about what the actual issue is here. The issue is people freezing their TRX just to vote and not using any of the resources that they get from freezing. The solution is to provide a way to vote without getting resources while simultaneously also keeping the existing system of obtaining resources and voting power. Now people who want to vote can just vote.

If you say that some people might still choose to vote and get resources and not use them, then so be it. They might do that even with the new proposed system. With all the alts just rising, there's already little incentive for people to stay in TRON. Making them choose between obtaining resources and receiving voting rewards will just make it worse and drive people away.

With the big increase in energy price, people want to gain energy so they are not paying exorbitant txn fees, but at the same time, also receiving voter rewards keeps them engaged. Bottom line, there was a reason why freezing TRX allowed for both resources and voting power in the first place and if resource hogging is an issue, we should look into ways that do not change the model that we are so accustomed to.

If users are provided to choose, they can only acquire resources, or they can acquire the right to vote at the same time, then there will be no incentive to encourage users to choose the former.

Users who use frozen resources and vote will lose their voting revenue but will get more resources. Considering that the current frozen energy usage rate is only 6.9%, even if the total frozen amount is reduced by half, users can still get Double the energy, according to the calculation in the issue, freeze 10000trx for one day, and all the energy obtained will be used, which is about 0.36 USD, and the voting income is only 0.0368 USD. The value of energy is far about the voting income.

[sean-liu55]

Both option 1 and option 2 will decrease the profitability for TRON users.

Either give the option to vote with a smaller freeze duration or just increase the total amount of energy in the network. This issue can be fixed so easily without making big changes that are going to hurt everybody.

The total available energy is related to the optimal amount of network calculations and should not simply be increased. As mentioned earlier, reducing the freezing time will cause users to rent a large amount of TRX in a short time, causing system stability problems.

For users who use resources and voting at the same time, in solution 1, even if the voting income is lost, the resource income will increase. Developers who actually use resources will benefit. In solution 2, the user will also use the dividend of the transaction fee to pay for the transaction.

[otakuinny]

@sean-liu55, above everything else, what TRON users most want is for the TRX price to go up. The solutions you are proposing will depress the TRX price even more. Any solution that involves distributing the txn fees instead of burning is not very good for TRX price, because there'll be more TRX.

Because of the block and candidate rewards, more than 5M TRX are created everyday. This already causes inflation and keeps the TRX price down. The only thing we have right now that reduces the TRX in circulation is burning for txn fees. If we make more energy available it'll mean less TRX burning, which means everyday there are more and more TRX added to the supply. And the more something is the less it is worth.

Besides, it is clear from your stats above that people just aren't interested in freezing trx for energy. So, even if we implemented your solution of only giving either voting right or energy, it still won't benefit the people who are burning trx for energy. The only people it'll benefit is the people freezing trx for energy but that's a very small fraction of the users. I just don't see how your solution will benefit the users that are currently burning trx for energy.

[sean-liu55]

@otakuinny, As the total frozen amount is reduced, developers will get more energy and may reduce the user's payment ratio in the contract, so that ordinary users can also benefit.

[otakuinny]

@sean-liu55, most dapps either pay for the txn fee themselves or they let the contract caller (user) pay for it. If they get a little more energy because of the reduced amount of trx frozen, they are not going to suddenly start passing on the savings to their users. That's just not how the economics of the dapps work in TRON.

It's clear, even from your numbers above, that no one really bothers to freeze trx to gain energy. So, increasing the energy gained by freezing trx is going to only slightly help a very small fraction of the users but implementing the proposing solutions to achieve the higher energy gain ratio will hurt all the rest of the TRON users.

[sean-liu55]

@otakuinny ，About 3 billion of energy comes from freezing every day, which is not a small amount. When the energy gained increases, developers with long-term plans will have more motivation to choose to freeze to gain energy.

[otakuinny]

@sean-liu55, in the last one week, a total of 817 billion energy was consumed. Of this, only 34 billion came from freezing trx. This means only 4% of the energy consumed is actually coming from freezing. The rest is from burning TRX (which is good because it reduces the TRX in circulation and increases its price). This 4% is not going to increase by a lot even if the energy rate per trx frozen increases.

Devs should always keep the txn costs in mind when they develop dapps. If more energy is available they are gonna develop a lot of crappy dapps that make millions of txns a day putting extra load on the nodes. This is already a problem right now. If they can gain more energy, this problem is gonna get worse. We are seeing more and more 503 errors from the nodes everyday.

Also, there are more regular users in TRON than dapp devs. A lot of these users freeze a good portion of their trx and use the remaining to interact within dapps. They rely on the income that comes from voting and also use the energy/bandwidth that comes from freezing to make dapp txns. The proposed change will force them to choose between voting and dapp txns which might reduce their earnings.

[sean-liu55]

@otakuinny，If freezing can only obtain resources or voting rights, no user should be willing to freeze TRX, just creating invalid transactions. On the contrary, if freezing can obtain resources and voting rights at the same time, and users are only to obtain voting rights, then the extra resources may become the source of invalid transactions.

[otakuinny]

@sean-liu55, if freezing only gives resources or voting rights it could result in users making too few txns, which would be worse than too many txns.

The only people this change benefits is the dapp devs. It hurts everyone else. The common tron user is someone who freezes a good chunk of his trx, gains resources, votes and receives rewards and uses the resources to make dapp txns. This is what most people do. This change will impact all of these people negatively and turn them away from TRON altogether.

[Omo-Coc]

@sean-liu55, if freezing only gives resources or voting rights it could result in users making too few txns, which would be worse than too many txns.

The only people this change benefits is the dapp devs. It hurts everyone else. The common tron user is someone who freezes a good chunk of his trx, gains resources, votes and receives rewards and uses the resources to make dapp txns. This is what most people do. This change will impact all of these people negatively and turn them away from TRON altogether.

Many users have no use for resources, it seems they only need voting rights

[otakuinny]

The impact on user revenue should be based on data and calculations. Please review the issue again.

Speaking of data, your numbers in the original post are no longer correct. The TRX price is different now and so is the energy price.
But since you are asking for numbers, here is the most likely scenario.
Current total energy limit: 90 Billion
Current TRX frozen for energy: 2.7 Billion
Current amount of energy gained per TRX frozen (as of 3/28/2021 4:43 UTC): 33.25
According to your numbers, only 7% of the energy used daily come from freezing TRX. So, out of 2.7 Billion, only 189 Million TRX is frozen for energy that is used daily. The rest of the 2.511 Billion TRX is just squatting on energy resources.
If you implement your proposal of only receiving voting rights or resources, these 2.511 Billion TRX will just vote and not receive any energy. When this happens, assuming the 189 Million TRX is still frozen for energy, the energy rate per frozen TRX increases by more than 14 times. It goes from 90 Billion / 2.7 Billion = 33.25 to 90 Billion / 189 Million = 476.
This means when you freeze 1 TRX you receive 476 energy, which is a crazy high amount of energy. I'm sure you understand what happens at this point. When energy becomes cheap, BAM!!! the low cost spam txns will come back and in full force, clogging up the network again.
And, if you are thinking that when energy becomes cheap more than 189 Million TRX will be frozen, it is not going to be the case. Like I said before, people are doing all kinds of things with their TRX and freezing the TRX and receiving voter rewards is just not as profitable when compared to mining/defi/ROI etc. So, no matter how cheap you make the energy, when they can just rent the energy for cheap for only a few trx a day and instead use the TRX for something else, they would prefer not to freeze.
You guys have increased the energy price by 14X in a matter of few weeks and caused great disruption to the dapp owners and users. You said you did that to combat low cost spam txns. Now you are proposing something that makes energy cheaper which will bring back the low cost txns again. TRX has just become deflationary where the amount of TRX burned has surpassed the amount of TRX created everyday. This is an important measure that will have a positive effect on the price as the scarcity of it increases its value.
There is a reason cheap energy is NOT a good thing. After the last 2 energy price increases, the dapps are still trying to adjust to the new space and are fine tuning their needs to fit the current system. The price of energy is currently not too expensive but not too cheap. It is currently at a sweet spot where fluctuating to either side will cause major disruptions to the dapp usage.
As it is, we are still seeing a lot of SERVER BUSY errors and failed txns. Making energy cheaper would be a colossal mistake that'd have far reaching effects.

I think the two solutions of this proposal are very beneficial to developers. They reduce the cost for developers to obtain resources. If someone makes garbage transactions, then he needs to freeze a large amount of TRX to obtain resources, or through Burning TRX to obtain resources, no matter which method is still expensive for him, this behavior is very unreasonable.

People were making spam txns when energy rate was 1 trx = 62 energy. When 1 trx = 476 energy, we are going to see a lot more spam txns.

[sean-liu55]

Spam and invalid transactions are inevitable, but the proportion is low and unsustainable. The energy obtained by freezing is different from the energy obtained by directly burning TRX, and the lock-up will further increase the cost of spam transactions.

[i7969407]

As a developer, I think the division of energy is a good suggestion for different users. Developers need a lot of energy, while users want to get more rewards. After several times of continuous promotion of sun, many developers have problems in their operation. If cheaper energy can be obtained, this is what I would like to see, and resources are not wasted. Take what you need and make the best use of it

[otakuinny]

Spam and invalid transactions are inevitable, but the proportion is low and unsustainable. The energy obtained by freezing is different from the energy obtained by directly burning TRX, and the lock-up will further increase the cost of spam transactions.

@sean-liu55, the impact of spam transactions on the network should be based on data and calculations. Please review the issue again and re-read my post above that details what making energy cheaper will do.

Right now, we already have a serious spam txn problem with low value TRX/TRC10 txns. Every time you make a TRX/TRC10 transfer there are at least 2-3 span txns that follow immediately. This already puts tremendous load on the network as the number of spam txns are effectively twice the number of real txns. If you make the energy cheaper there will be a lot of TRC-20 spam as well, putting even more load on the already stressed nodes. I see a lot of failed txns from nodes and the energy freeze rate is 33/TRX right now. If the energy freeze rate is around 476/trx, no one will be able to make any smart contract txns.

It is pretty easy to see what'll happen when energy becomes cheap. This proposal lacks foresight, I find it amazing that this actually came from a TRON foundation dev.

[otakuinny]

As a developer, I think the division of energy is a good suggestion for different users. Developers need a lot of energy, while users want to get more rewards. After several times of continuous promotion of sun, many developers have problems in their operation. If cheaper energy can be obtained, this is what I would like to see, and resources are not wasted. Take what you need and make the best use of it

Why do developers need energy? Make your users pay the txn fee. If you have a dapp and it is worth anything, your users will pay for the txn fee to use your dapp.

[i7969407]

The problem lies in the high frequency of my dapp calling contract, which causes high cost to users and a lot of pressure on promotion. Therefore, as a developer, I am trying to provide most of the energy to users as much as possible. Although this is not a good solution, it really solves my urgent need at present

[sean-liu55]

@otakuinny ，No energy is required to transfer TRC10/TRX transactions

[otakuinny]

@otakuinny ，No energy is required to transfer TRC10/TRX transactions

@sean-liu55, yes, I know trx/trc10 txns do not consume energy. I was saying, there are a lot of trx/trc10 spam txns right now and if energy was cheaper, there will be a lot of trc20 spam txns as well and then nobody would be able to make any smart contract txns cos all the nodes would always be busy with the spam trc20 txns.

[sean-liu55]

The network does not limit the ratio of the number of TRX/TRC10 and TRC20 transactions. In addition, there is no way to benefit from making spam transactions, other than spending transaction fees.

[otakuinny]

The network does not limit the ratio of the number of TRX/TRC10 and TRC20 transactions. In addition, there is no way to benefit from making spam transactions, other than spending transaction fees.

Lol, what? You guys used the spam txns as an excuse to raise the energy cost 14X and now you are saying spam txns were never an issue. Whatever, go ahead and do what you want. You guys have already decided to adopt this proposal. Regardless of what is said in this discussion, if you decide unilaterally to adopt the proposal, what's the point of this thread?

[sean-liu55]

It's not that there are no spam transactions, but that spam transactions want to occupy most of the network resources and will consume a lot of fees. This issue is used to collect opinions from all sides, and all opinions will be carefully considered, including yours.

[i7969407]

It's not that there are no spam transactions, but that spam transactions want to occupy most of the network resources and will consume a lot of fees. This issue is used to collect opinions from all sides, and all opinions will be carefully considered, including yours.

I think that although the handling fee has increased by 14x, trx has started to deflate as a whole. Without affecting the high cost of users and developers, this proposal is beneficial for more developers and users to enter the tron ecosystem. It seems that the handling fee has increased by 14x and the energy has decreased by 14 times. It seems that there is no difference, but in fact, the overall market value of trx has been increased without changing the user experience, which is conducive to the development of TRX. If the value is supported, the ecological development will be smoother instead of being gradually divided into markets by other public chains. So please start the layout of 207 as soon as possible.

[otakuinny]

It's not that there are no spam transactions, but that spam transactions want to occupy most of the network resources and will consume a lot of fees. This issue is used to collect opinions from all sides, and all opinions will be carefully considered, including yours.

But when you make energy cheaper spam txns WILL NOT consume fees. They'll just freeze TRX, get a lot of energy and use that energy to make the spam txns. Also, when energy becomes cheaper, TRX won't be burned as much during txns. So, this proposal will result in 2 things

1. It makes it easy to make spam smart contract txns by making energy cheap
2. TRX will not be deflationary anymore because energy is cheap and TRX won't be burned for fees as much as before.

This one proposal might very well end TRON for good.

[sean-liu55]

The proposal NO.19 could decrease the total frozen energy if the spam problem you call occurs.

[otakuinny]

The proposal NO.19 could decrease the total frozen energy if the spam problem you call occurs.

First, the spam problem will definitely occur if energy becomes cheaper. If your solution to address the spam txns is to reduce the total energy limit and make energy expensive again, then what's the point of this proposal??

You make energy cheaper, spam txns occur, then you make energy expensive again. Is this your plan?? Am I only the one who thinks this is silly.

If this is the case, why not just increase the energy limit to 200 Billion right now to make energy cheaper??? This way you don't have to implement a lot of changes to the current resources model, which actually achieves the exact same thing.

[sean-liu55]

The purpose of this proposal is not to simply reduce transaction costs. In addition, reducing the total energy is only a preliminary plan to deal with the extreme cases of spam transactions.

[otakuinny]

The purpose of this proposal is not to simply reduce transaction costs. In addition, reducing the total energy is only a preliminary plan to deal with the extreme cases of spam transactions.

What other purpose is there other than to make energy cheaper?

[sean-liu55]

The purpose of this proposal also includes allocating resources to those who really need it.

[otakuinny]

The purpose of this proposal also includes allocating resources to those who really need it.

NO!!! This proposal DOES NOT allocate resources to anybody. If this proposal is passed and if I need energy, am I getting energy automatically in my account? No, I am not. I still have to freeze TRX to get energy. So, this is not some free energy give away to those who need energy. This proposal just aims to make energy cheaper by dismantling an established system of receiving resources/voting rights that has been in place since TVM went live more than 3 years ago so it could prevent a few addresses from hoarding energy.

So, just because some accounts are hoarding energy, you decided to change the system that a lot of people rely on and create a revenue loss for all of them. And the cherry on top is that instead of fixing things this proposal is going to make it even worse by creating an environment where nodes are flooded with smart contract txns and where energy is so cheap no TRX is burned for fees, thus making TRX coin inflationary again.

These are not just my assumptions. I have backed them up with numbers in the posts above. TRX is just picking up momentum and getting recognized in the crypto community as an all-in-one blockchain. The last thing we need is to look like it is massively centralized where a random dev from the TRON foundation can create a no-merit proposal and gets it passed to rectify a problem that does not exist.

WORST TRON IMPROVEMENT PROPOSAL SO FAR !!!

[i7969407]

The purpose of this proposal also includes allocating resources to those who really need it.

When will this bill come into effect

[sean-liu55]

@otakuinny, Your concern about spam transactions is excessive. The price of resources and the total frozen amount of resources are not abrupt changes but will be gradual because the previously frozen resources and Tron Power will be retained and released when the unfreeze operation occurs.

[sean-liu55]

The purpose of this proposal also includes allocating resources to those who really need it.

When will this bill come into effect

It is expected to be released in version 4.2.

[otakuinny]

@otakuinny, Your concern about spam transactions is excessive. The price of resources and the total frozen amount of resources are not abrupt changes but will be gradual because the previously frozen resources and Tron Power will be retained and released when the unfreeze operation occurs.

I realize that the energy does not immediately become cheaper the moment the proposal is implemented. I know it takes a while for the frozen TRX to get unfrozen. But why does it matter how long it takes. It could be a week after or maybe a month after, but eventually, the TRX will be unfrozen at some point. And with every unfreeze, energy becomes cheaper and cheaper and spam txns become larger and larger.

My concern is not just about spam txns. My primary concern is the loss of revenue I and several hundreds of thousands of other TRX users are going to incur because of this proposal. Right now I'm freezing 1.5M TRX and receiving close to 270TRX in voting revenue everyday and also using the energy I'm receiving to make smart contract txns. How will this benefit me and all those who are doing the exact same thing I am doing? I need to unfreeze my TRX every now and then for reproportioning. If this proposal is passed, I'll only receive either voting rights or energy. If I choose energy, I lose voting revenue and if I choose voting revenue I'll have burn TRX for energy which costs a lot. Are you personally going to compensate me for my loss??

Not everybody is participating in century mining or in defi. Some of us are actually trying to make TRON a productive place by actually building dapps and using them. This proposal will be devastating to all those who need resources and voting revenue.

Why is it every time you guys pass a proposal it always ends up making a loss for the average TRON user??
And why do you say it is expected to be released in v4.2?? Isn't this a proposal that needs to be voted on by SRs???

[otakuinny]

@otakuinny, Your concern about spam transactions is excessive. The price of resources and the total frozen amount of resources are not abrupt changes but will be gradual because the previously frozen resources and Tron Power will be retained and released when the unfreeze operation occurs.

Here's what is very likely going to happen. The huge trx that was frozen for energy will stay frozen keeping the energy freeze rate where it is but the people will small amount of trx will only either voter rewards or energy once they unfeeeze.

So, in this scenario, which is actually very likely, the proposal fails to achieve it's intended objective because the bulk of the trx will stay frozen for energy but ends up hurting the people by taking away their voting revenue.

WOW!!! No matter how you look at it, this is an absolute $#@%-show of a proposal. Thanks @sean-liu55. I didn't know you hated TRON this much.

[Vita-Diva]

@otakuinny, Your concern about spam transactions is excessive. The price of resources and the total frozen amount of resources are not abrupt changes but will be gradual because the previously frozen resources and Tron Power will be retained and released when the unfreeze operation occurs.

Here's what is very likely going to happen. The huge trx that was frozen for energy will stay frozen keeping the energy freeze rate where it is but the people will small amount of trx will only either voter rewards or energy once they unfeeeze.

So, in this scenario, which is actually very likely, the proposal fails to achieve it's intended objective because the bulk of the trx will stay frozen for energy but ends up hurting the people by taking away their voting revenue.

WOW!!! No matter how you look at it, this is an absolute $#@%-show of a proposal. Thanks @sean-liu55. I didn't know you hated TRON this much.

This is just a assumption. You are ASSUMING this will happen.

But, from the perspective of DAPP devs, most of us burn TRX to acquire energy, as far as I know. As the energy fee is three times more than what it is before, together with the price of TRX keeps on going higher, we do suffer from the dramatically increasing cost these days. What I'm expecting is a plan to overcome this problem.

I don't think TRX holders like Binance are likely to use their energy from their massive freezing. If much unused energy is unleashed, I will try to hold TRX rather than burning it.

Just leave the proposal to the SRs to vote and decide.

[otakuinny]

@otakuinny, Your concern about spam transactions is excessive. The price of resources and the total frozen amount of resources are not abrupt changes but will be gradual because the previously frozen resources and Tron Power will be retained and released when the unfreeze operation occurs.

Here's what is very likely going to happen. The huge trx that was frozen for energy will stay frozen keeping the energy freeze rate where it is but the people will small amount of trx will only either voter rewards or energy once they unfeeeze.
So, in this scenario, which is actually very likely, the proposal fails to achieve it's intended objective because the bulk of the trx will stay frozen for energy but ends up hurting the people by taking away their voting revenue.
WOW!!! No matter how you look at it, this is an absolute $#@%-show of a proposal. Thanks @sean-liu55. I didn't know you hated TRON this much.

This is just a assumption. You are ASSUMING this will happen.

But, from the perspective of DAPP devs, most of us burn TRX to acquire energy, as far as I know. As the energy fee is three times more than what it is before, together with the price of TRX keeps on going higher, we do suffer from the dramatically increasing cost these days. What I'm expecting is a plan to overcome this problem.

I don't think TRX holders like Binance are likely to use their energy from their massive freezing. If much unused energy is unleashed, I will try to hold TRX rather than burning it.

Just leave the proposal to the SRs to vote and decide.

Ofcourse, I'm assuming that it will happen, but it is an assumption based on reasoning and even Sean liu said the exact same thing 2 posts above that energy will not be made cheap immediately. If there's no guarantee that the trx hoarding energy right now will ever be unfrozen, then all this proposal does is to take away the voting revenue from the users for absolutely no reason at all.

If you are a dapp dev, how are you burning trx for energy? Energy for a txn will either be consumed from a contract creator's account or consumed/burned from a user's account.

SRs have no power at all in passing proposals. TRON foundation owns more than 19 SR nodes. They pass or fail any proposal unilaterally.

[sean-liu55]

The code will be released in version 4.2, and it is up to the SRs to decide whether to pass.

[i7969407]

The code will be released in version 4.2, and it is up to the SRs to decide whether to pass.

I hope to update the version soon