Bitcoin Forum

After Segwit, the fees have been becoming very low. But expect it to be high again once the bull market returns or someone floods the mempool again. The good news is that it will be expensive for the spammers to flood the network. Let's dare them to do it again to show the whole community that Bitcoin's blocks can reach 2mb because Segwit. 8)

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DlOcG3sV4AA_axw?format=png&name=large

This is good and all, but we have yet to see how it handles floods. A stress test is required.

It really surprises me how many people and services are still not using Segwit though.
Now, these last couple of months, the percentage of Segwit transactions has steadily risen to just under 50%, but that can still be much better.

https://i.imgur.com/SJmHfLS.png

If you're still using legacy addresses, it's definitely time to switch!

Edit:

Source: https://transactionfee.info/charts/payments/segwit

Definitely. The mempoor can definitely be flooded again like we had at the end of last year, but chances are it definitely will be less flooded due to the increase on SegWit adoption(unless we see a significantly bigger hype compared to last year's).

Even the Blockchain.info(now .com) still doesn't support segwit. Like what the hell?

It is strange that blockchain.com is still not support SegWit, they announced that it would be this year - but seems they are to busy with adding BCH and by changing the domain. Roger Ver was one of owners, maybe he have some influence even today - by what that service takes as its priorities, it is not hard to see what is going on there.

SegWit will be tested only when next big BTC pump is start, but it is nice to see that almost 50% of all transaction is using SegWit. Since fees are too low most users do not see the difference and advantage of using SegWit, but when time comes they will switch to cheaper option.

technically speaking the fees went down because of 3 main reasons which i will list in order of importance effect:
1. spam attack against bitcoin network stopped for whatever reason: maybe because SegWit was activated finally, maybe because BCash went away, or maybe because Dash and other altcoins that were spamming got dumped hard. but the spam attack stopped.

2. price became more stable, specially in the past 4 months. and without huge rises or huge falls there is always less transactions on the network.

3. with SegWit we got about 20% capacity increase (so far) which helped a lot and also some of the big services started batching their transactions which improved things a lot too.

I think Ver and bch are indeed the reasons they are holding the segwit adoption back at blockchain.info.

At least this tells us that if we have legacy addresses somewhere we should swap our bitcoins to compatibility address now when there aren't many transactions that are taking place. Many services don't accept SegWit, I guess this is because they don't want to touch anything as it is working now. Wait for LN to be implemented on major wallets/services and we can see once again fees to go down and speed of transactions to increase. Fees and scalability are only temporary problems that are/will be solved in the future.

Still there are many sites which havent adopted segwit. I dont see any problem doing it but a negligence from them. We have already seen the fudsters who clogged the network and we dont want another one soon. So its better to not all them.

thanks, I was looking for a SegWit adoption percentage chart...


I think in the end it was a good thing that blockchain.info has not adopted SegWit yet, at least it is a good thing that they weren't the first to adopt it. because the tensions were high in the early days and considering the fact that blockchain.info has a history of being buggy and there are multiple major fund loss incidents involving their products, I would say they might have messed things up with SegWit and added to the tension in the early days.

besides people shouldn't even be using a web wallet in first place.

Last year major spam attack was always right before/after big bitcoin hard forks,like BCH,which makes me think that the hard fork devs had something to do with all the attacks.I guess they wanted to block the bitcoin core blockchain,so more and more people will switch from bitcoin core to bitcoin cash.
Their plan failed,in the end. ;D

It's not just segwit, it's the number of transactions that has gone down
Actually right now we're below January 2017 levels, far before the spam attack

https://i.imgur.com/hYz5NuG.png


Let's just ...not!

Bitmain could just unplug their miners for a few hours and the whole capacity gained by segwit will be destroyed by higher blocks time. I just hope that they still have two brain cells active and don't try to put such plan into action.


This is actually one of the main reasons for the drop in transactions and it was clear when Coinbase went offline for a few hours.

So even though the price hike's up the TX fee are the same? Isn't it? But in case there will be another hardfork it will cause Spam attack. Just like other Bitcoin fork.
I hope bull run start so we can test that segwit adoption.

That is very good news and I hope it will continuous for a while before the bull. Am always burdened with transaction fee but at least I can breathe but there are still some site that some high fees.

I kinda feel the opposite, nearly 50% in one year is pretty good. Plus, for now people don't feel pressured enough because the fees are so low, but if we'll have congestions again, adoption will speed up.


I hope Bitcoin's game-theoretic fundamentals work as intended and spamming is unprofitable and very costly. I assume that the attack has stopped because they realized that it failed to achieve their goals - make people switch to Bcash out of frustration caused by high fees.

this is 50% adoption under constant FUD about SegWit and newbies being told they will lose money if they use it with nonsense such as "everyone can spend". considering this i'd say it is more than good.

this doesn't make any sense!
switch to BCH for what? there are 3 groups who own bitcoin.
1. investors who want big profit
2. people using bitcoin as a currency to pay for stuff with a decentralized currency
3. people who use it as a currency and as an investment.
why would any of these switch to BCH? investors gain more profit in bitcoin, and even if they wanted to , there are a lot of altcoins for investment. they won't SWITCH, they will invest in those for more profit.
the others spending, CAN NOT switch to BCH because places they spend do not accept BCH!

Hahaha. Bitmain would not dare. What it would start is a stronger debate for a POW change through a UAHF. But if Jihan Wu wants his mining cartel to die then no one is stopping him from killing it.

a POW change will only make Bitmain and Juhan Wu stronger and much richer than they are right now!
you think they give a shit if you make their current equipment useless? not at all because you are not only making their equipment useless, you are making all ASICs useless. Bitmain will happily start building new ASICs for the new algorithm and starts selling new equipment to miners that already had ASICs but now they can not use them anymore.

to be honest I wouldn't be surprised if some day Bitmain pushed for a PoW change! practically it will create demand for their products!

LN does nothing to transaction size at all or transaction fees directly.
Schnorr does.


both of these are included in #3 that i mentioned. i didn't want to put batching in another number since it was not some separate thing.
as for SegWit block size, it can be a lot bigger but it is currently not. based on its adoption the size of blocks is usually around 1.2 MB which is that 20% increase i mentioned.

I think that at that point they've realized that if they BTC goes down so does BCH..

The first spam wave worked for BCH and they've managed to become to become 2dn crypto in November but their mistake was that it happened in a bull market. When they've tried it 3 times as hard it had no effect, all the coins were going down and the gap between BTC and BCH was never going to be bridged.
What if they would have done it at a different time?

But this is a matter of if... and nobody knows the answer.


Well, in theory, you could create an algo that would render not ASIC useless but mass production of ASICs barely profitable....
But this is almost impossible when you have a reward of 1800*7000$ each day laying there for the miners to grab.

I believe you are overestimating Bitmain, and underestimating game theory's motion in Bitcoin. It would be the best for Jihan Wu to act for himself and for the good of the network than acting only for himself.

Plus heavy losses in Bitmain are coming because they have over-invested their Bitcoins in Bitcoin Cash, and they are hoping their IPO will bail them out, which might not be.


Tinfoil hat on. Hahaha.

yeah it's really great, but as it's tied to the bear market and lower interest in crypto, it still need to get tested under the more difficult circumstance. Anyway, it's a great start :)

Still there are many sites which havent adopted segwit. I dont see any problem doing it but a negligence from them. We have already seen the fudsters who clogged the network and we dont want another one soon. So its better to not all them.

Only those who willingly wants to distort history would claim they there are no significant impact the launching of SegWit has bring to bitcoin transactions. I remembered a time that the pool is so full and you need to pay in percentage in other to get your transactions confirmed among several issues then. With SegWit all of those are becoming thing of the past and even if the price of bitcoin increased to that of last year and activities increased so much, I don't see any increase in transaction fees to such high point again.


I don't understand the basis of your argument. He might have started or being part of those who started Blockchain.info now blockchain.com, but he is no longer involved in the day to day running of the platform and it even took a long while before blockchain.com integrate bitcoin cash on its platform. Eventually, I think its because SegWit has come as a game changer which then reduce the fee across board that makes no significance difference of fees in those who uses SegWit and those who does not that why they still stick to their status quo but when the tide change and they realise that customers are leaving their platform for alternatives, they will do the right thing.

In terms of Bitcoin, it's the same and will stay like that for a very long time until Bitcoin can be divided in to smaller amounts other than satoshi. Also we'll be having more solutions (Schnorr) for Bitcoin's scalability problem as time goes by to maintain Bitcoin's tx fee very cheap.

They're probably too lazy to add it and because of them not adding segwit i've stopped using them.

If all Bitcoin wallet starts switching to Segwit addresses the network will be less busy. Spammers will have a hard time clogging the network with transactions.  What's not to like about that?

I agree, but I think part of the problem is that a lot of people are still using services that haven't upgraded their wallets. I decline to say wallets because although the users probably think they're using wallets... they're really just using website services and all users are on a handful of wallets with private keys all controlled by site owners.

One of my favourite sites is still non-SW, I've asked them about it and apparently, the reconsolidation of everything is just too difficult for 1 guy to do. I suppose it would be painful, and I even said doing it now with low fees is probably the best time. So they're happy to stick with charging higher fees and their users still don't mind. Same as my employers whom I've tried to convince. I guess the inconvenience is simply too great.

If I didn't have to rely on a few services for so long, I'd have moved 100% myself as it's practically hassle-free for me, Electrum upgrades, I sent everything I had from old to new. But still have to keep old wallet for people who can't send to bech32.

The good news is a lot of the Alt coins {including Bitcoin Cash} that was used to as a alternative "transfer" option, has lost a

lot of momentum and these people will soon realize that these Alt coins is just a bunch of smoke & mirrors and pump n dump

schemes. Why would you need to buy a Alt coin as a alternative transfer media, if SegWit transfers does the same job just as

fast? If you used the Lightning Network, you would never use any of these Alt coins again.  ;D

I agree to what drm posted though. Blockchain.info has started to accept Bitcoin Cash deposits first but has not implemented Segwit because of what? I believe it's politics.

But yes, they will do the right thing because they will have no other route but have to use the best implementation. 8)

Sorry but at this point, it's you who wants to distort not history but the current reality.
I've already posted a graph here (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4948576.msg44616927#msg44616927) right now, we're below 2017 and even 2016 transaction number levels.

In the current situation, segwit or not segwit the blockchain would not experience the same high transaction fees.

Segwit adoption and more important transaction batching have helped overcome the spam attack but right now there are blocks getting mined each day 1/4 and 1/2 full, the activity has cooled a lot.

this is a statement that i will never understand and i have seen multiple users make this statement.
what transfer? to where?
to pay for stuff? to transfer money to someone else? donations?
none of these happen with altcoins. for instance if i wanted to buy some goods from a merchant that was accepting bitcoin, when BCH forked, they didn't start accepting it so how could i use BCH "as an alternative transfer option" when they didn't accept it?
transferring money to someone else? why would i do that when the other person only wants bitcoin not an altcoin because he is not capable of installing another wallet.
donations? nowhere accepts BCH or altcoins donations. at the bottom of PirateBay website is bitcoin SegWit address and is written a LOL in front of BCH :D

there are some altcoins with usage like LTC and XMR,... but majority of them are not used for anything else apart from trading.

Indeed, segwit adoption improving transaction speeds and lowering costs and this feature has been around for over a year but still, there are many exchanges and wallet providers not integrating it. Although segwit has significantly decreased the number of pending transactions in the Bitcoin mempool but I would like to see it tested during high-rate transactions per second such as happened before when bitcoin price spike to $20,000 whether it’ll prove to be invulnerable to spam attacks in its current incarnation or not. To deal with it, the ideal number for segwit adoption needs to be at least above 75%.

It has been a very big relieve to me when moving fund via the bitcoin network, but some exchanges are yet very greedy, they refuse to reduce their transaction fee despite bitcoin transaction fee drop. I think they are too greedy.

when the time comes, they will adopt segwit willingly to cut their costs
the reason they're not adopting yet, most likely because of time/resources for re-writing the back end system

true, anything over 10k~20k satoshi is a bit too much and most exchanges wants 50k+ sats
in a normal network traffic like these days, even a 5k satoshi should be more than enough for withdrawal fee
I think they set it high to discourage arbitrage trading (and make profit at the same time)

Yes no one could forget those days when bcash was deliberately pumped and at the same time,bitcoin network was flooded with fake transactions creating congestion in the network and making transaction fees go much higher and also many miners switching to mine Bcash at that time.

Newbies, despite what some people are telling you, Segwit is an improvement to the Bitcoin protocol. The blocks are nearing 95% full, and yet the confirmation times and especially the fees are normal.

Mempool spammers, flood it. Put the network to a test. 8)

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dp65c4lU8AIKUmM.jpg

You're very correct,even though swgwit has made things a bit cheaper for us, not every exchange is incorporating such reduction in their transaction fees...

And i do not feel anything can be done about this,considering this is a decentralized platform.

I'll simply just trade with the exchanges that have a reduced fees, as long as I do not leave my investment in an exchange,then I think I'm safe with them.

Lightning Network can effectively reduce transaction costs, and transactions in the Lightning Network are almost immediately effective!
Lightning network can also bring higher anonymity!
The large-scale promotion of lightning network can expand the practical application of cryptocurrency!

The fees aren't normal, but a fucking steal. People have to take into consideration that we're talking about the most secure and liquid network. Bitcoin's block space is the most expensive sort of storage in the world, and we're paying peanuts to utilize it.

I don't think mempool spammers are the main obstacle we'll be facing, but miners themselves. Last year the main source of network congestion was caused by miners moving insane amounts of hashpower from BTC to BCH, then back to BTC, then again to BCH, etc. These hashpower movements slow down block times to such degree, that it automatically causes more network congestion.

At peak the average block times were pushed to over 15 minutes instead of the regular 10 minutes.

Fees are so cheap now it’s incredible. Confirmations are as quick as I can remember. I know it was largely due to the Ver/Jihan attack but during the last bull run (my memory is terrible but) I’m pretty sure I was paying $15-$20 fees.

To be fair to them, switching to Segwit isn't as simple for them as it is for us. We just need to move our funds to a wallet that supports it and we're good. They have to change their entire system (and they'll be spending  lot of money on this) without breaking anything. There's also an issue with compatibility, as people with old wallets won't be able to move their funds to a Segwit address. It sucks, but I kind of see why they're putting it off. Segwit is designed to be opt-in anyway, so they have the freedom to choose whether to adapt.

But yeah, services like exchanges won't necessarily drop transaction fees if/when they switch to Segwit anyway, so if nothing else, it will be for the well being of the network.

Haha. Yes, it's below normal. 8)


But there was an address that kept flooding the network with small transactions at the height of the "scalability" debate, and both camps were pointing fingers at each other on who was responsible for it. This was happening before the Bitcoin Cash chain split.

The flooding was done on Legacy Bitcoin, not on SegWit. I would like to see the spammers trying to replicate that attack on SegWit, because that is going to cost them a arm and a leg and my guess is that it will hardly have any impact at all.  ::)

I made use of the opportunity to shift all my coins onto SegWit, while the network is uncongested and the fees are low, so I am geared up and ready to go, for the next push.  ;)

Let the games begin!

It is just very bad that people that Bitcoin made, that none would have heard about them are the one holding the development and the progress of Bitcoin back, miners, investors and developers. Now I do understand this quote that "we can accomplish anything provided we do not care who get the credit" this power struggle and greed need to stop

Thanks for creating this topic ,fees are low ,accept accepted but its not effective as expected ,what will happen if bitcoin doubles in price ? The fee will skyrocket as well ,we still need better transaction fix for bitcoin

 :) :) :) :) :)

I wouldn't be so sure of that. Yes, SegWit makes spamming more expensive overall, but it's not that the dirty tricks the big block camp will come up with won't be having a significant impact anymore.

Last year Bitmain's pools have frequently been mining empty blocks just to troll Bitcoin, and by doing that they knowingly said goodbye to $50-$100k in fees alone! Does that sound like they care much about money?

Another thing is that the fees they spend on sustaining spam attacks largely flow back into their pockets, so what's there to lose? They don't mind spending money on marketing Bcash at cost of Bitcoin.

Probably. But segwit is just a start. And compared to when we don't have avtivated segwit, the fees right now are much more acceptable than before. We wouldn't know yet if the fees will double if btc makes another rally but definitely segwit made a difference.

Currently due to lower demand the fees are also lower but as soon as like last year if it reaches the peak fees will rise to great extent and much more than what it is at present. Depending upon the demand and transfer that take place the fees are applicable.

windfury has gone way overboard advertising segwit and LN lately. im starting to wonder why. especially with lack of stats to back it up

the reality is this
1. fees now are MORE then they were when segwit was conjured up as a solution that could lower fee's. so its not actually lowered fee's. it just hiked them up pre segwit and then offered just a modest discount to bribe people to use segwit (ven hough after discount fees are still higher)
by this i mean in 2015 when blocks were approaching 1mb limit the fee's were cheaper before segwit than fees are now even when blocks now are not full

2. blocks are not full, not due to segwit solving anything, but because there are less transactions per block.
yes less people are using bitcoin

3. i know he will spin around and say mor % are using segwit. but if you start selling 2500 banana's where 0% are green
and then start selling 1500 banana's and of the 1500 banana's 10-40% are green.
that does not mean that they are selling 250-1000 green bananas(using old normal utility)
that does not mean that they are selling 2750-3500 bananas

they are only selling 150-600 green banana.. meanwhile 1000 people stopped buying bananas altogther because the price to even touch a banana has gone up

.. all it takes is a good look at the statistics can show this

he is trying to say the unconfirmed tx is due to more transactions and more than 1mb
yet. all he is showing is unconfirmed transaction count.. but that has NOTHING to do with segwit
.. when you look at the block data there are LESS data per block
https://www.blockchain.com/charts/avg-block-size?timespan=2years
and less transactions in general
https://i.imgur.com/hYz5NuG.png

because less people are transacting. and yet FEE's are HIGHER than 2015

now then
bitcoin actually was planned to REDUCE min fee/min dust/min relay when btc price rises.
EG when prices went from $600 to $6k or $100 to $1k . the decimal of min fee/min dust/min relay SHOULD HAVE dropped to counter deflation.

 but the group pushing to promote segwit actually pushed UP the min fee, to cause a fee war and then spam the network to get the feature they wanted.
and since then the fee's are stil higher than before segwit.

lets put it into context
even if segwit was not adopted.. if the btc core crew reduced the min fee by 1decimal to counter the BTC price.when BTC went from ~$600 to ~$6000...
then based on transaction counts fee's would have been the same as 2015

but what happened though. is core DID NOT reduce the min fee by 1 decimal to counter the btc price rise. but they also done their witness scale factor trick

this is why it feels like data for data. price equilibrium makes it a 40x fee hike compared to 2015
hense why the half penny of the past is now ~$0.20 average at best. which segwit then trickery gives segwit a $0.05 fee as the bribe to use segwit.
even though thats still 10x more then 2015 of similar data position.

im guessing he may rebutt about the data of a segwit transaction....
well, take a transaction of lets say 2-in 2out of full validation data of a transaction, both legacy and segwit
you will find segwit actually uses more bytes than with legacy



maybe its time windfury done some research rather than just PR
i would give windfury the benefit of doubt that he simply was not around in 2015 to know what really went on in the community. but seeing his latest efforts of PR. im starting to doubt that as his reasons for promoting segwit, even when the real stats show overwise.
(fee total $ per day 2015 $*k 2018 $***k even though prices only went up 10x(yea he cant even twist it into blaming deflation(pricerise) because i mentioned above  ))

yea, funny part though.
the timing of the spam was when core needed bips activated and was PR campaigning the bip will solve the spam and fee issue.
the spam coincidently stopped once cor got the bips they wanted..
wait not a coincidence once you do data analysis and found out which merchants, mining pools and mixers were doing it and then noticing who was affiliated with such mixers, pools and merchants

(thats old news by the way. and has been myth busted.. so no point windfury is there reason for you to conjure up that old PR script and try to pretend/twist the narrative back into the myth of it not being cor intention)

another funny part. segwits mandatory chain split happened first. bitcoincash didnt even make a block until hours later. .. yep segwit supporters actually used the evidence that cash couldnt make a block to activate cash until hours later as a PR campaign in itself.. also evidence that segwit caused split can actually be found by looking at block data.

..
dang windfury. your PR scripts someone hands you are so out of date and bust.
maybe best to check your sources before repeating the propaganda. as its becoming too obvious now.

your just repeating old 1-3year stuff

Its a good thing to see that fees have become relatively low due to segwit as you have said but what also contributed to the low transactions fees is also the down market because once the bull market returned the fee will still get hick again and until then let keep enjoying the moment doing our normal transactions with low fees.

What "stats" are you looking for? That the block sizes are over 1mb and the fees are below normal levels. I can send a Segwit transaction paying for a fee if two satoshis per byte and it will confirm in 30 minutes.


Gaslighting again. Beware of his lies and manipulation, newbies.


It is a malleability fix and opens the road to more "updates" that are inclusive through soft forks, like Schnorr.

If Segwit was not "marketed" as a scalability solution, but only as a malleability fix, it might have activated within three months in my opinion.


Then he will throw one long post composing of "technical" terms that later we'll find out that did not make sense. I will call it Memefication.