Solana’s Flaming Fees: A Caveman’s Guide to Burning SOL

by

Behold, the latest Solana Improvement Document, SIMD 547, a brainchild of the enigmatic cavemanloverboy, proposes a fee system as fiery as a dragon’s breath-100% of the new fee shall be consigned to the digital flames. What mischief might this ignite?

A new Solana Improvement Document, SIMD 547, birthed by the minds at Temporal XYZ, now lies exposed to the voracious scrutiny of the public. It dares to suggest a fee system predicated on the very resources consumed, a concept as novel as it is audacious.

Under this regime, every lamport of the new fee shall be immolated, a sacrificial offering to the gods of deflation. The aim? To align transaction costs with the computational toil endured by the network, and to ensure that SOL burns with the fervor of a thousand suns as activity escalates.

Read also: 

Solana Co-Founder Proposes New Crypto Network Bootstrap Model

The Essence of SIMD 547: A Fee Proposal of Pyrotechnic Proportions

The author, cavemanloverboy, has unleashed this concept upon the world as a “rough brain dump,” a phrase that conjures images of primordial ooze and intellectual chaos. The core argument, however, is as clear as a mountain stream: at a paltry 3,000 transactions per second, the current base fee burn yields a mere 648 SOL daily, a sum so insignificant it might as well be pocket lint.

This, the author laments, renders SOL a woeful instrument for those seeking to bask in the network’s glory. The proposed remedy? A fee of 0.1 lamports per cost unit, a sum so carefully calibrated it might as well have been divined by the Oracle of Delphi herself. This fee, in its entirety, shall be consigned to the flames.

The author assures us that this figure was chosen with the precision of a Swiss watchmaker. Most market makers, those titans of arbitrage, request fewer than 2,500 cost units per oracle update, ensuring their fee increase remains a modest 5%. Yet, for the common token swap, costs may soar by a staggering 600%, a figure that would make even the most hardened trader blanch.

Should the network deem it necessary, the fee could escalate to 1 lamport per cost unit, a move that would see daily SOL burns reach heights of 10,800 to 64,800 SOL. A dynamic controller, as fickle as the winds of fortune, would adjust the rate each epoch, ensuring the network remains as unpredictable as a Nabokov novel.

SOL Strategies CEO: A Voice of Caution Amidst the Flames

Michael, the sage of SOL Strategies, has taken to the digital agora to offer his thoughts on this incendiary proposal. He welcomes the notion of resource-based fees with the enthusiasm of a man who has just discovered fire, yet he raises questions as sharp as icicles.

He draws a distinction between SOL, the token, and the “Solana Economy,” a concept as nebulous as it is grand. SOL, he posits, is but a currency, a mere tool of exchange, while the Solana Economy encompasses the vast tapestry of apps, businesses, and users that weave the network’s fabric. To conflate the two, he warns, is to commit a categorical error of epic proportions.

Interesting proposal, but let’s think it through:

1. SOL v Solana Economy

“turbocharge the solana economy” (in quoted post) and in the proposal: “SOL quite a terrible asset to gain exposure to network activity”

Two things here, the “Solana Economy”, a concept I’ve been talking…

– Michael | SOL Strategies (@m_hbbrd) May 31, 2026

Michael further notes that, based on the figures proffered by SolanaCompass, the proposal would result in the annual immolation of 650,000 SOL. Against an inflation rate of 3.8%, this would reduce the supply by a mere 0.1% per annum, a figure so insignificant it might as well be a rounding error. “Insufficient,” Michael declares, his tone as dry as a martini.

The Proposal’s Design: A Tale of Interests and Intrigues

Michael also points to a tension within the proposal’s structure, as subtle as a Chekhovian subplot. The document, he notes, makes explicit reference to market-making activity, particularly the esoteric realm of propAMM-style updates. The proposer, Temporal XYZ, operates a propAMM platform on Solana, a fact that raises eyebrows as bushy as Nabokov’s.

While Michael does not dismiss the proposal out of hand, he urges caution. To build network tokenomics around a single use case, he warns, is to place all one’s eggs in a basket woven from the flimsiest of reeds. The dominant activity on Solana, he reminds us, has shifted like the sands of time, from NFT mints to memecoins to propAMMs, with perpetuals now looming on the horizon. To design fee structures around today’s trends is to ignore the lessons of history, a folly as great as any committed by the characters in Pale Fire.

Finally, Michael raises a point as weighty as a Russian novel: Solana’s edge lies in its speed, low cost, and programmability. As agentic activity grows and institutions of ever-greater stature begin to operate on-chain, the network must support transaction volumes that feel as free as the wind. Any fee increase, no matter how modest, must be considered within this broader context, lest the network lose its luster and become as passé as a Victorian novel.

Read More

2026-06-01 13:12