Title: Babylon Staking Sparks Bitcoin Fee Surge: Transfers Hit $105 Before Plummeting Post by: larry_vw_1955 on August 22, 2024, 10:29:05 PM On Aug. 22, Bitcoin’s onchain transaction fees took off, soaring to more than 1,250 satoshis per virtual byte (sat/vB), which translated to over $105 per transfer at 8:45 a.m. EDT. However, by 9:40 a.m. EDT on Thursday, fees had dropped to 625 sat/vB or $53.26 per transaction.
A day like today is likely a breath of fresh air for the mining community as they can collect more fees than usual. https://news.bitcoin.com/babylon-staking-sparks-bitcoin-fee-surge-transfers-hit-105-before-plummeting/ you asked for it you got it. don't like high transaction fees then maybe you're not using the right crypto. lets stop trying to "time" our transactions and just pay the fee...you want proof of work, you got it! ;D Title: Re: Babylon Staking Sparks Bitcoin Fee Surge: Transfers Hit $105 Before Plummeting Post by: nelson4lov on August 22, 2024, 10:41:47 PM The moment I saw that Babylon staking is going to go live on their Mainnet, I know fees would spike up by over a 100%. That's what happens whenever there's more transactions in the mempool that miners can currently mine — fees go up and it becomes a bottleneck situation. It's not a proof of work like you're implying because even Ethereum faces the same problem despite being a proof of stake chain.
It's the same with all these other chains that claim to be "ultra fast", "ultra cheap" and then succumbs to congestions too. If there's one thing I know is that something has to give. You either give up Security for performance or it's the other way round but not both. Title: Re: Babylon Staking Sparks Bitcoin Fee Surge: Transfers Hit $105 Before Plummeting Post by: Charles-Tim on August 22, 2024, 10:52:27 PM I can see the fee started to rise at 1:36 pm but the mempool high fee priority at 3:00 pm was 8 sat/vbyte. Later it got back to 4 sat/vbyte.
https://talkimg.com/images/2024/08/22/7BjUP.png https://talkimg.com/images/2024/08/22/7B11j.png All occured in just less than 2 hours and the mempool is so less congested right now again as if nothing happened. 4 sat/vbyte transactions are getting confirmed right now. Title: Re: Babylon Staking Sparks Bitcoin Fee Surge: Transfers Hit $105 Before Plummeting Post by: larry_vw_1955 on August 22, 2024, 11:57:50 PM The moment I saw that Babylon staking is going to go live on their Mainnet, I know fees would spike up by over a 100%. That's what happens whenever there's more transactions in the mempool that miners can currently mine — fees go up and it becomes a bottleneck situation. It's not a proof of work like you're implying because even Ethereum faces the same problem despite being a proof of stake chain. It's the same with all these other chains that claim to be "ultra fast", "ultra cheap" and then succumbs to congestions too. If there's one thing I know is that something has to give. You either give up Security for performance or it's the other way round but not both. hopefully there's more staking. miners are fine with it and the more useful bitcoin can be for different things that helps ensure its longevity irregardless of some peoples desire to skirt paying the going fee. trying to "time" transactions like Loyce has a thread about is kind of like being a cheapo and not really supporting the network in my opinion. no miner wants to have people like that. :o one thing to keep in mind about staking into any project is that you no longer control your bitcoin. so the entire thing could be a scam... Title: Re: Babylon Staking Sparks Bitcoin Fee Surge: Transfers Hit $105 Before Plummeting Post by: Darker45 on August 23, 2024, 01:14:53 AM That was only a quick spike in the fees. Right now, it's back to 4 sat/vB.
And I don't fault people for timing their transactions. It's unfair to call them cheap for making the most of the rise and fall of the network traffic. And who wants to pay exorbitant fees really? At "$105 per transfer", you don't actually want people to use Bitcoin as designed. Aren't you yourself bothered paying this high a fee for your ordinary transactions? Would you not mind paying a fee that's more expensive than what you're buying? Your logic is quite off. I'm using the right crypto because I'm paying high transaction fees? That doesn't sound reasonable. And proof of work is the reason? I use LTC at times. It's proof of work and its cheap. Title: Re: Babylon Staking Sparks Bitcoin Fee Surge: Transfers Hit $105 Before Plummeting Post by: larry_vw_1955 on August 23, 2024, 02:00:58 AM That was only a quick spike in the fees. Right now, it's back to 4 sat/vB. And I don't fault people for timing their transactions. It's unfair to call them cheap for making the most of the rise and fall of the network traffic. And who wants to pay exorbitant fees really? At "$105 per transfer", you don't actually want people to use Bitcoin as designed. Aren't you yourself bothered paying this high a fee for your ordinary transactions? Would you not mind paying a fee that's more expensive than what you're buying? well you need to support bitcoin miners. they rely on transaction fees more and more over the coming halvings. if you're going to try and cheap out on fees, i don't think they're going to like that. unfortunately it was a very quick spike but at least they got something but i know they want more. and no i'm not bothered by higher fees since i don't use bitcoin for daily transactions. :o Quote Your logic is quite off. I'm using the right crypto because I'm paying high transaction fees? That doesn't sound reasonable. And proof of work is the reason? I use LTC at times. It's proof of work and its cheap. that's cheating though if you're avoiding btc because ltc is cheaper. why not just use ltc exclusively? if it's good enough for transferring your money around then it's good enough for storing it there. Title: Re: Babylon Staking Sparks Bitcoin Fee Surge: Transfers Hit $105 Before Plummeting Post by: ranochigo on August 23, 2024, 02:54:31 AM I don't understand what's wrong with trying to 'time' our transactions to get the lowest tx fees. If your transactions aren't urgent, then you can just wait out for the fees to drop or if you're able to, then you can just conduct the transaction on LN. High transaction fee, or a volatile fee market is quite common for cryptos that are popular and shouldn't come at a surprise.
I wouldn't want to try to pay extra just to 'subsidise' miners when the halving comes along. Doesn't really make sense as our goals doesn't align in the first place. Title: Re: Babylon Staking Sparks Bitcoin Fee Surge: Transfers Hit $105 Before Plummeting Post by: Darker45 on August 23, 2024, 03:59:56 AM That was only a quick spike in the fees. Right now, it's back to 4 sat/vB. And I don't fault people for timing their transactions. It's unfair to call them cheap for making the most of the rise and fall of the network traffic. And who wants to pay exorbitant fees really? At "$105 per transfer", you don't actually want people to use Bitcoin as designed. Aren't you yourself bothered paying this high a fee for your ordinary transactions? Would you not mind paying a fee that's more expensive than what you're buying? well you need to support bitcoin miners. they rely on transaction fees more and more over the coming halvings. if you're going to try and cheap out on fees, i don't think they're going to like that. unfortunately it was a very quick spike but at least they got something but i know they want more. and no i'm not bothered by higher fees since i don't use bitcoin for daily transactions. :o If I'm paying 4 Sat/vB right now, which is equivalent to $0.34, I don't cheap out on fees. As a matter of fact, I'm paying exactly what's required for a high priority transaction to get through. Like it or not, that's what the network requires. Bitcoin isn't a charity. It's a payment system. If there is a need for users to be charitable to miners, paying more than enough, in order for the system to continue running, then something must be wrong with it. It might not be sustainable at all. Fortunately, it isn't the case. The price of Bitcoin is more than $60,000 right now and just a few weeks ago, difficulty reaches another ATH which means the mining environment remains robust and highly competitive. You're not bothered, but what about those who prefer to use Bitcoin on a daily basis, the very people Bitcoin is primarily created for? If you recommend for them to use centralized platforms or second layers instead, isn't it the same as not supporting Bitcoin miners since they aren't paying network fees anymore? Quote Quote Your logic is quite off. I'm using the right crypto because I'm paying high transaction fees? That doesn't sound reasonable. And proof of work is the reason? I use LTC at times. It's proof of work and its cheap. that's cheating though if you're avoiding btc because ltc is cheaper. why not just use ltc exclusively? if it's good enough for transferring your money around then it's good enough for storing it there. Many people are using options and that's not cheating. Are there rules to cheat on, to begin with? If LTC is cheaper than Bitcoin, then anybody is free to use LTC instead. In the same manner that if Monero is more private than Bitcoin then anybody is also free to prefer Monero instead. There is no rule and it's not necessary to be exclusive, to be religiously loyal. Humanity won't move forward if we stick to something merely for the sake of sticking to it. Your logic is quite off once again. It doesn't follow that since a medium is good for moving value it is automatically a medium good for storing it. |