Bitcoin Forum

The price is too high.

I'm living in China, I want to sold several my books, it's about 10-30 CNY, and worth only 0.09 BTC-0.27 BTC.

You can see the inconvenience lies in the small numbers, though it's not very obvious.

If the prices keeps going up, the problem is going to be obvious. So I suggest that the team move fast, to make something = 10^-3 BTC.

Don't forget the transfer fee just ate 10% of the low end of your BTC book price.

Maybe it would be tolerable if the transfer fees would deflate with the currency.

That doesn't seem to be happening. Perhaps  0.3.22 will allow 0.000001 transfer fees.

Whoever mandated the .01 transaction fee on a complete whim is a complete and utter moron. We need the fee lowered IMMEDIATELY.

The fee should really move to 0.001 or 0.00001 per KB ASAP. After all, the price grew for least a hundredfold since the 0.01 fee was instated.

Having to pay $0.20 per KB is ridiculous. This is more expensive than other internet payment services instead of less!

0.3.22 is already out, cut the fee only in half and still enforces the .01 fee. Only 0.3.23 will then have the .005 fee (which is still too high imo.) which is scheduled "soon (TM)".

It's not that it's overpriced. It's that the fee isn't subject to market forces. That's the biggest crime.

bitcoins are divisible to 8 decimal places. so i don't see what's wrong. Dealing with zeros is pretty easy. is 0.01 any different from 1.0? assuming they're the same value.

nobody's forced to use the main client.

(i say this only because what counts as 'market forces' is a very flexible notion.)

Well, now I feel compelled to start a new client.

I agree... we shouldn't have any of this anti-spam rules... it would be based upon what the market can sustain for fees.  The market will quickly set the minimum fee, naturally... Of course... that would be the end of free transactions also... But when were transactions ever 'free'?

If I was better at coding I'd create a 'no-min-fee' client.

And nobody is forced to use a particular version of it, either. I guess the holy free market is in favor of a 0.01 fee for now?

I'm still trying to understand the fee and when its taken out.  (I'm pretty new still).

For instance I sent my friend 1 bitcoin, and he recieved one bitcoin.  I was debited 1 bitcoin (no fee from what I could tell)

Someone sent me 50 bitcoins, and I recieved 50 bitcoins. (no fee from what I could tell?)

My question is where does the fee come into play? why wasn't I charged a fee.  

As far as the zero's I think people will adapt, we seem to be fine with zeros the other way.  like a 15,000,000,000,000 debt ceiling ect.

People unhappy about the default client settings are free Omg, run for the github repository, make a pull request, if you can't code, pay someone to do it, if you don't feel like it don't use this client.
Either way the people who code the client don't owe you shit.

+1

Hmm we need a website called 'what fee will I need'  where it looks at the waiting time and calcualtes the fee that you need to pay to get your transaction validated in reasonable time.  There should be no artificial limits to what people can set their clients fee to.

It's not in my interest entirely! Not at all! If they care about this project, they would certainly act in its best-interest and lower the fee! It's a matter of survival for the whole paradigm at large! One of the main benefits of Bitcoin is absolutely bastardized by this absurd fee: an adjustable fee subject to market forces from independent nodes. Not all of these nodes are ran by specialized coders.

The fee is based primarily on how much a burden it places on the network, not how many coins you send. When there is a fee it is payed by the sender.

If you had received 100 different payments and then tried to send all your coins at once you would most likely have to pay a fee since your transaction combines together many small amounts. That produces a relatively large amount of data for the block chain compared to most transactions.

If you send the same bitcoins back and forth very often or send very small amounts there is a fee involved to prevent spam.

Great idea!  Although I do personally believe a minimum tx fee of something more like .0001 would be a reasonable limit on the minimum side.

I think this is a very bad decision too.
But you just don't call people morons, especially when they give their time for building software you probably use.

The fee is like a 'priority flag' that tells the nodes that are verifying transactions (miners) they should tend to them immediately, in exchange for the fee if they solve the current block. I do agree the fee should be correlated to a sliding window of average price, but that would require some kind of decentralized exchange that could communicate the price, not a single point-of-failure like Mt. Gox (or any other singular exchange).

It's a simple one-liner, well documented and available as a patch... all you need to do is compile.

I already requested such a client, and I guess by tonight someone will have built one.

Once transaction cancellation is possible, it will be safe to let the user pick any fee they want, since there will be no serious consequences. Right now sending a transaction with too low a fee might get it stuck permanently.

Do you have any goddamned clue why that fee exists? It's because we are still susceptible for a DDoS attack involving billions of 0.00000001 transactions in a single block.

Don't bash the coders. If it wasn't for them, you wouldn't even be here.

Or in other words... respect your elders you 17 year old kid.

I remember someone saying (Gavin I think) that bitcoin isn't meant for small transactions.  "Small" is relative, however.  It certainly punishes the very poor.

Why does anyone need to change the source?  Just remove the fee from your client.  Problem solved.  Mandatory fee is only for super small transactions.

It costs the bitcoin network something like 0.001 US cents to process a typical transaction (http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=3332.0), so transactions less than about a cent don't make sense.

RE: using market forces for transaction fees:  I agree 100%.   But that code has to be written and thoroughly tested.  The hard part is figuring out how miners communicate their "fee schedules" to clients (you can't just ask miners "what's your fee schedule" because they have an incentive to lie to try to get higher fees...).

So in the very short term fees are being dropped from 0.01 BTC per kilobyte to 0.0005 BTC per kilobyte.

I'll say it again:  expect more growing pains like this.  There will be more of them.