There’s currently no official wallet however there are some very good community ones available. Auro been my personal favourite having a browser addon similar to metamask as an added bonus
Really good conversation here with some cool ideas. It seems there is a general consensus that we like do something with the account creation fee, and that it would make sense to do it at the next hard fork. This would be an ideal candidate for piloting the Mina Improvement Process. @Pete since you started the thread, do you think there is a particular approach here (e.g. change to 0.25) that could be further developed for vetting, and then made formal in a MIP if folks are supportive?
1 Like
I think this would be a great opportunity to enact a change in the Protocol that would be very popular within the Community and certainly attract new investors and headlines. I would definitely be happy to raise a yes/no proposal on changing the wallet fee from 1 to .25
I think that other proposals will need more detailed discussions, but as a relatively straightforward binary question it would make a great first test of the MIP procedure. It would also show the Community that this forum can be a place where intelligent discussion leads to positive action.
Any thoughts on the next steps? @b_mckenna
1 Like
Maybe I will say something totally stupid, but isn’t it strange to have a price in Mina ? I mean the price of 1 Mina is not fix (and I hope it will increase a lot again). Maybe it could be interesting to have a stable coin on the Mina blockchain, and to fix the price with the stablecoin ?
Maybe it’s in the Minaprotocol roadmap to have a stable coin for futur needs ?
Yes, that is another potential solution Chris (it’s def not stupid), it’s something I thought could be considered too.
My only hesitancy is that I would imagine connecting to a stablecoin would be more complex to implement? And also does this go slightly against the forward movement and descentralisation?
I also wonder (especially at this early stage) could the time could be better spent on other things?
Here is a quick poll I did today for a few hours in the community Twitter account. Obviously this just gives the yes/no option, but seems to be a popular choice.
Ok, very quick poll. Please give feedback too. What would you say if the Mina Wallet creation fee was reduced from 1 Mina to .25 Mina? @MinaProtocol
— Mina Crypto - Community(@minacryptocom) December 10, 2021
4 Likes
Imho, as long as the protocol can handle, 0.1 Mina (and 0.01 when the token price and protocol strength increase even more) looks smoother and more natural.
I’d be interested to see the other side of this. Obviously every token holder would rather lower the price, but there must be a reason for it in the first place. If the limiting factor is how many accounts the network can support, then maybe some simulating is in order to come up with an optimal value for network health.
Can anyone tell me more about the relevant parameters? @lamps mentioned that we can support 300k wallets. Where does that number come from? And what are the factors that parameterize it? The state expiry idea that @garethtdavies posted is interesting too. But in a world where there’s fundamentally more demand for wallets than the network can support, then the fee would have to be scaled up right? Either a dynamic fee, or aggressive state expiry, or a combination.
Every day there are ~800k active addresses on ethereum: https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/ethereum-activeaddresses.html#3y
According to this article from a year ago, there are over 1 million eth wallets with 1+ eth: Ethereum Statistics: Over 1.03 Million Unique Addresses Hold 1 ETH or More – CryptoMode and at the time that article was written, the active daily addresses were ~400k, so half of today.
It seems like there must be millions of accounts with a little bit of eth. So what happens when that many people want to use mina?
1 Like
Hey @Pete. Nice work on the poll, there does seem to be good support for this. The next steps I would suggest would be to create a new post in this thread that outlines the singular idea in more detail like described here or like Evan’s idea here. If there is broad support then it would be worthwhile formalising the idea into one of the first MIPs! The drafting process for MIPs should be ready next week, so still time to vet the idea further here.
1 Like
MIP:
To reduce the current 1 mina wallet creation fee to .25 at the next hard fork.
This change would be based on the understanding that the Community endeavour to reach a further consensus on a solution for the long term price for wallet creation within a period of time.
Context:
Currently I believe the 1 Mina wallet creation fee, while still relatively small is a considerable barrier for some new users owning Mina. Should the price of Mina increase this will further limit incentives for smaller investors who may, despite their interest choose other projects over Mina.
Reducing the fee will do a number of positive things
1: It will make wallet creation and investing easier for people with a smaller budget. This will lead to an increased visibility of the project, which will in turn attract more stake-holders, opportunities and engagement.
2: It will lead as an example to the growing Mina Community that there is an opportunity for their voice to be heard and to enact positive change on the Protocol through discussion and involvement.
Feedback
I conducted a flash poll on Twitter
The embed system here doesn’t show the results, but from 183 votes over a 4 hour period on a simple binary yes/no to reducing the fee
83.6% said they would support
16.4% said they would not.
Conclusion
I have not included any data or information on potential effects the change would have on the network activity. I have also not submitted any information on the potential security implications of making the change and this would be my only reason for hesitancy.
Comments from @evan here that this is something do-able at this time reassures me that the network is strong enough to sustain it.
Currently Zk Snarks are receiving a lot of attention and I believe any boundaries that restrict adoption to Mina at this current stage will negatively impact the growth of the project from both a Community and Development perspective. By taking the initiative, Mina would reinforce its relevancy.
NB: The change is not designed to be a long term fix, but as a temporary solution it will open up more detailed discussion on the way forward.
If we were to enact this change we are broadcasting the following positive statements.
1: We want Mina to be accessible for all
2: The Mina Improvement Proposal process can be an effective tool for intelligent discussion and action.
3: If you become part of the Community, you can make a difference.
Would you agree to reducing the wallet price from 1MINA to .25 MINA at the next hard fork with a view to a consensus on a long term solution.
- YES
- NO
0 voters
3 Likes
I don’t mind a small fee for creating the wallet as long it’s not too much in $. So having a flexible system in place would be the best.
Or maybe something like an existential deposit like Polkadot uses so keep the network clean and fast.
I’m really surprised that the cost of 1 mina to create a wallet hasn’t been reduced yet. I believe that the fair value should always be the equivalent of 0.25 cents and that this value is always burned to decrease the amount of Mina in circulation.
2 Likes
We are really starting to make headway with this and I feel it has sufficient community approval to be implemented BUT I need help with some parts of the MIP proposal.
I have pasted the parts below and there are guidance notes too. I would really appreciate any feedback @evan @bkase @o1brad @o1emre @Trivo @lamps (look for the ***** below)
Backwards Compatibility
***** Help needed with this part (see below for notes)
All MIPs that introduce backwards incompatibilities must include a section describing these incompatibilities and their severity. The MIP must explain how the author proposes to deal with these incompatibilities. MIP submissions without a sufficient backwards compatibility treatise may be rejected outright.
Test Cases
***** Help needed with this part (see below for notes)
Test cases for an implementation are mandatory for MIPs that are affecting consensus changes. If the test suite is too large to reasonably be included inline, then consider adding it as one or more files in ../assets/mip-####/.
Reference Implementation
***** Help needed with this part (see below for notes)
An optional section that contains a reference/example implementation that people can use to assist in understanding or implementing this specification. If the implementation is too large to reasonably be included inline, then consider adding it as one or more files in ../assets/mip-####/.
Security Considerations
***** Help needed with this part (see below for notes)
All MIPs must contain a section that discusses the security implications/considerations relevant to the proposed change. Include information that might be important for security discussions, surfaces risks and can be used throughout the life cycle of the proposal. E.g. include security-relevant design decisions, concerns, important discussions, implementation-specific guidance and pitfalls, an outline of threats and risks and how they are being addressed. MIP submissions missing the “Security Considerations” section will be rejected. An MIP cannot proceed to status “Final” without a Security Considerations discussion deemed sufficient by the reviewers.
Thanks for the tag!
Since a change in wallet fee is also only a config-based change, I don’t think we need to fill out the first three points.
There will be no issues with Backwards Compatibility, and there will also be no need for a Reference Implementation since it’s just a config change. For Test Cases, I would suspect that the wallet fee won’t have much of an influence, since account creation should already be covered by internal tests.
However, I think it is reasonable to list a few thoughts under the Security Consideration section.
While reducing the fee from 1 MINA to 0.25 MINA, this might not have a low-level security impact, we should still list possible Security Issues concerning the actual protocol. My thought regarding that:
- Lowering the fee down to 0.25 MINA allows not only for users to create addresses easier, but also for malicious actors. A malicious actor could, if the wallet creation fee was low enough, theoretically pollute the ledger with accounts. However, considering the current Dollar-value of Mina at the time of this post, a malicious actor would still need to raise ~$0.9 in order to create an address - therefore a lot of resources would still be needed in order to execute such an attack. Additionally, the ledger is currently of size 2^20, roughly 1,050,000, so with 0.25 MINA wallet creation fee, polluting the ledger would still be a massive hurdle for potential malicious actors. Therefore, I don’t see any security concerns with lowering the wallet creation fee. (assuming this was one of the initial concerns that resulted in selecting 1 MINA as fee)
1 Like
Thanks for the detailed response @Trivo awesome. Thanks also for reinforcing my thoughts and adding your opinion in such a succinct way. I want to give everyone a few days on this and then see if we can move things to the next stage 
2 Likes
In agreement with you in decreasing the wallet price as Mina but I wonder what the rest of the community thinks and how impactful this change would be. @b_mckenna, can we provide a brief update on where this in the M.I.P process?
@RHT313 MIP process is ready and this Idea is maturing all time so I think its ready for a pr to be opened in the MIPs repo
Perfect! It’s great to see movement on this! @here for everyone in this conversation if you were curious to know more 
0.25 MINA sounds reasonable to me.
However, I have no clue on what the limit should be to prevent attacks/pollution.
I see no reason to reduce the cost of the wallet. What kind of small depositors are we talking about who do not want to pay 1 MINA 
. In the ETH network, each transaction is paid much more than once for creating a MINA_wallet. Even at a price of $10, the cost of a transaction on the MINA network is $0.01.
1 Like