Bitcoin Forum

Hi -

Tried to send $0.24 worth of bitcoin and this pops up:


https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-VjHB22LKq_E/U_ErypA9CQI/AAAAAAAAQlg/chDa1jLrhaw/s649-no/lolaz.jpg

Is this what they mean when they say Bitcoin can never be used for micro transactions?   

Is this one of the 10 million things the Bitcoin dev team should have fixed 12 months ago, but has slated for "some time in the next 5 years" instead ?

Meanwhile the entire financial industry sees Bitcoin as having major flaws and never incorporates it.

And we never go ot the moon, because a bunch of developers have decided "we dont need that fixed right now.  we'll do it later" ?

Or is this something else?

-B-

Is it something else?

Yes its the dumb ass like you dont understand the economic of bitcoin infrastructure. You can send btc with any amount as a fee. But that tx will not be confirmed for a very long time.

Micro payments are all relative. 25cents are way too small and unrealistic.

Its not a problem for blockchain to fix but its a service for a 3rd party.

well my bank charges a flat fee of US$ 4 to send money to other bank account.

I know how Bitcoin works.  Im making a point.  I am able to send up to $5,000 completely free of charge from one Chase bank account to another persons Chase bank account, instantly.  With no miner fees or waiting time either.

What a dumbass I am.  And now you see another reason why consumers have zero incentive to use Bitcoin.  Because dumbasses like you think this is a "dumbass" thing to take issue with.   Rather than addressing it as a real issue for future consumer adoption.  Which it is.

-B-

It is a problem which hopefully will be addressed in the future because it defeats the point of spending small amounts.

Coinbase has double the fees of blockchain, just as a heads up. If you want to send small amounts use custom send on blockchain. Just a suggestion for the future.

Yea, i was doing a test payment to my cold storage and it cost me 2x the amount in fees than what I transfered, lol... but still 12 cents or so isnt that bad for a transaction..

Also, i think coinbase was having issues getting their transactions included in blocks, by doubling the lowest amount, its assured that it will be picked up quickly... Id rather pay a little more in tx fees than waiting hours (or days) for a tx to confirm

if mining pools would simply accept the fact that they are rewarded with 25btc right now for their work and that extra fee's are something only needed in atleast 2 decades time and not now. then YOU will realise that the fee is not needed right now. and are given/ required, purely for greedy purposes

then in the uptopian dream of zero greed, bitcoin can be used for microtransactions without a large cut.

if mining pools would simply just accept transactions into blocks instead of ignoring them all the time, there would be no issues.

i personally have a client thats in the advertising business and would love to be able to send amounts of under 20c to people as often as he liked, rather then having to set monthly payouts or minimal account balance before payout.. he thought bitcoin was the solution.. yet the tx fee due to mining pool greed is the cause of why he wont get involved in bitcoin

The TX fee for most transactions is usually 0.0001BTC. I don't know why coinbase are trying to charge you double.

The tx fee is not related to the amount you are sending, but related to how much network resources your transaction uses and how "spammy" the transaction looks. The purpose of fees is to prevent someone from spamming the network by sending the same BTC over and over between 2 addresses.

Try entering in 0.0001BTC in that field, it should confirm fine.

Better yet you just proved that you're even dumber by comparing 2 transactions which are not even on the same level.

I guess you will ask everyone whom you sent money to sign up for a Chase bank account huh?

You're not just a dumb ass, you're at another level of stupidity.

No it wont. i tried that...

The amount of tx's that can go in a block is limited right now (well its by MB but thats essentially the same). Additionally full blocks DO take noticeably longer to propagate the network and do increase the risk of the block orphaning. Some miners take the risk and include free tx's for altruistic reasons, but most miners are running a business and they are not going to risk their 25BTC reward for free.

The field may seem editable, but it really isn't. The set fee is 0.0002. Blockchain's custom send allows you to set the fee, which is a huge advantage and freedom. Coinbase disgusts me for these types of reasons.

it is a problem when u send some money between A to B, then find out that the website didnt calculate the fees correctly and u need to send a fraction more only to find u need two lots of 0.0001

With coinbase? Coinbase is not a wallet but essentially a payment processor so they might enforce their own fee rules. But you can send a transaction with any fee you like. There are miners still including free transactions, technically if you waited you could broadcast a tx without any fee and it'd probably be mined if it wasn't really large in size (i'm talking kilobytes not amount of BTC) or really spammy looking. I've never sent a tx with a fee over 0.0001BTC since the fee rules were changed and all my tx's have been included in the next block. With the old rules I used to never pay fees and never had any problems.

DO you realise this is not a problem with blockchain protocol? And the OP was ranting about how "developers" didnt fix it?

The whole bitcoin infrastructure was built on economic incentives. Its not about mining fee, but the risk of having orphan blocks. Mining fee is just a presentative of the size of the tx.

ppl like OP are so fcking thick to understand. This is not an issue, as there WILL be service offered by 3rd party.

Ah right. So thats a coinbase thing. I'd recommend using a "real" wallet rather than a payment processor like Coinbase for many reasons, such as this. If you use Coinbase, you don't have any bitcoins, you have an IOU for certain amount of bitcoins from coinbase. They can get goxxed just as easy as Mt Gox.

Best bet is to switch to blockchain as I've said.

I've had experiences in the past with Coinbase with small transactions <0.001 not going through at all and such. At least they have support haha but the whole system isn't developed to what it could be. Taking 0.001 a transaction is greedy.

Just because you understand the "economic of bitcoin infrastructure (sic)" doesn't mean you get to call everyone who doesn't a dumb ass.

micro payment is 1 USD or 1 Euros ...  ;)
and for this, you pay only 0,04 euros to send 1 euros (tested on bitcoin core and bitcoin android wallet).

it's perfect for bakery stuff.
http://static.ddmcdn.com/gif/inside-carlos-6.jpg

Or Bar stuff.
http://insidenewyork.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/venue-bar.gif

While 9 pennies is a hell of a lot better than 30 pennies +2.9% found with many traditional merchants your concern is somewhat valid and we should encourage lower fees for micro transactions.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2q9pItnO0U&t=17m52s

Anonymous and trust less Payment channels facilitated by oracles could solve this concern.

you can try electrum and set a 0 fee
but it may take some time to get received

I think the analogy with the Chase example would be sending from one Coinbase account to another, I agree, that should not require a fee.  As others have noted the standard fee is .0001, which may preclude micropayments but is better than Paypal would be.

Is this the formula for a credit card?  That would mean that spending $0.25 would cost the merchant $0.31?  Or is there another credit card formula for micro transactions?

 There is an 848 page law in the US and tucked away in it somewhere it says that merchants can set a credit card minimum purchase of up to $10, as long as they treat all cards the same. It also allows the Federal Reserve to review and increase the minimum payment amount.
I don't imagine any merchant is going to let you charge any amount that would cost them more money than they would make on the transaction.

Or you could equate it to buying something on NewEgg that cost something like $2.50 and having to pay S&H like $6 to get it delivered 3rd day mail.

Like the Post office, they have different rates for overnight, first class/etc.

The "miners" are what move btc, not paying for their storage of the entire blockchain nor the bandwidth/power bill well.. you might as well put the quarter in an envelope and place a stamp "hint cost more then .25 cents" and mail the quarter.

Icon

The block is not rewarded to the pool, it's split to the miners. Very little goes to the pool operator.

This is one of the annoying things about Bitcoin and miners...greedy miners they are not required to charge a fee. the system is like capitalism and is prioritizing due to incentive something which is a flaw in our brains and basic philosophy.

30 pennies +2.9% is what Paypal charges and is normal for many credit cards. Because of Interchange fees credit cards are at least 2% for Profit driven companies even if the Business is so large they own their own credit division or bank. With credit cards there is a perverse penalty where small businesses pay 3-8% per transactions and the large multi-national corporations drive the costs down to a little above 2% per transaction.

Bitcoin is already much better than credit cards, but has room for improvement. Payment channels will solve the 10min avg confirmation problem,  blockchain bloat problem, and the micro-transaction problem.

There are already multiple payment channels for bitcoin for micro transactions ... but they tend to focus on tips now.

No.  This is what they mean when they say that Bitcoin is not designed to handle microtransactions on the blockchain.


No.  This is something that entrepreneurs will provide a service for when there is enough of a market for it.


The financial industry is welcome to see whatever flaws they like.  They are welcome to hire programmers to fix whatever they like as well.  It's open source and decentralized.  If you don't like it, fix it.


Bitcoin isn't a "get rich quick scheme".  Get over it.



Definitely something else.


And how long until that Chase transfer becomes 100% irreversible?  I suspect Bitcoin wins on that point.

I am able to send 10 BTC ($5,060 at the moment) completely free of of charge from my bitcoin wallet to another person's bitcoin address instantly with no miner fee as well.

Tell me this...

Can you open a brand new Chase bank account with a $0.01 deposit, with no monthly fees, regardless of minimum balance and regardless of the number of months with no activity on the account?

If you were to use electrum, it would come instantly. It would not be spendable until it is confirmed, and most probably would jam up all your BTC, which is a pain in the ass.

Stick to fees, little fee is better than no fee.

Something tells me that the OP is using a purchased account. As it has been mentioned before the TX fee is based on how "big" the TX is measured in KBs or how much data is required to store it on the blockchain.

BTC is generally not very efficient for use in extremely small transactions however is still more efficient then most other payment methods even at this level.

Coinbase, it's like MtGox but newer.

Examples of Bitcoin Microtransaction payment channels and their costs :

1)   Bitcoin Microcharity
www.bitcoinmicrocharity.org
https://coinbase.com/apps/533cf8ef7947a4153900001d
90% of the money raised will go to a designated charity
 0.24 Cent micro transaction costs 2.4 cents

2)   Tip Pal
https://coinbase.com/apps/53a3f40c547d5870ce000022
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.tippal.app

fee = 0

3)   Coinbase
http://blog.coinbase.com/post/64708670240/how-to-send-bitcoin-on-reddit

http://blog.coinbase.com/post/57483182558/you-can-now-send-micro-transactions-with-zero-fees

Fee = 0

4)   Changetip
https://www.changetip.com/

Fees = none for transactions

5)   QuickCoin
http://www.quickcoin.co
Fees = 100 bits
24 cents  micro transaction costs 5 cents

The cost of Micro transactions with Bitcoin is therefore nothing.

It's not exactly a flaw, resources, including space in Bitcoin blocks, are limited and the capitalistic system allows the people who need/want something, including space in a block, to pay more than people who want/need it it less in order to ensure they receive it. Greed is a flaw, but there is a difference between greed and participating in a market.

seriously.. your going to roll with that sheeple excuse passed down from a miner trying to hide their greed.
blocks are NOT 100% full, there is plenty of space in all blocks to accept all transactions that appear in the period between each block. no one should be waiting more than 30 minutes to have a tx accepted. and on the very smallest of occasions, a few people may have to wait 20 minutes. (very few occasions)

secondly the reward is the reward. end of. they should not be compensated for ignoring transactions. the reward should be for allowing transactions(the whole point of making blocks(infact the whole point of what a blockchain/bitcoin is)). saying that miners should get a bonus for preventing the loss of a reward.... that is the weak and pathetic excuse miners give.

no one should get a bonus for only doing half their job.

again bitcoin is a ledger system, the point of the ledger is to have details of transactions in them. if miners want to have a blockchain of no transactions per block because they are in the belief that blocks should be empty to get paid.  and that entering a transaction should be a 'premium' then they need to seriously realise that they are not part of the community and simply greedy selfish people that dont care about bitcoins usefulness, and only care about their own wealth.

I don't think miners should get paid the extra miners fee until there is no reward, but then it would be a shock if we didn't have tx's and all of a sudden started them.. but I say they should get rid of them. when I used to mine, .01bts was considered a big transaction fee (all of them) but I have seen much larger ones, when we went from 50 coins to 25 coins, I think the tx's fees were as much as the 25btc reward, if not more, people wanted to be a part of "history"...

I didn't say they were 100% full.

Lets say we time how long it takes a 1KB block vs a 500MB block to propagate the network. Lets say it takes 1 minute longer. That means that there is a 10% increased chance of an orphaned block if it is 500MB in size vs 1KB, because until it fully propagates another miner could publish a block causing theirs to orphan (this happens a lot more often than you think). An orphaned block will cost the miner 25BTC, so the miner is risking on average 2.5BTC for a full block vs an empty one. Why would they risk that for free? They are a business, they don't do things that cost them money for free.


Not really. A lot of the blocks Satoshi mined are empty. They still add security to blocks below it. Transactions that are already in the blockchain will gain an extra confirm.

Weren't they going to change transaction fees from 10k satoshis to 1k? What happened to that?

Also, that site you posted your screenshot of is requiring you to pay 20k satoshis which is double than the normal amount.

I thought it wasn't mandatory to pay a transaction fee? I send coins to some of my cold wallets without a transaction fee every now and then cause I'm not in a hurry of when it shall get there.

OP, make a pull request and propose a solution

If you have some time on your hands you could probably get that confirmed as a zero txt
It would take a while but it should be possible to send that amount for free.
But as others have said its still a significant amount cheaper than bank fees or transfer fees.

That said if you want it done promptly for that amount send the txt fee.
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Transaction_fees

Or Eligius Block
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Free_transaction_relay_policy

Hopefully off chain transactions can counter this problem, anything over a few dollars is fine with the small tx fee though. BTC is very powerful for larger transactions.

Huh, the default fee is 0.0001 BTC ($0.048)
You might use 0.00005 for fee, but the confirmation time will very slow.

But that fee is small compared to bank/paypal
Paypal fee is about 2.x% + $0.3, it's very big compared to $0.09 only  ;D

So, bitcoin is still good for  micro transactions  :)

Tell that to the billions of people living in the third world.

I was wondering about this.
The CC system gets a authorization number, and doesn't batch the transactions out until day's end.

Is there anyone working on an off-chain system?

So now lets see you send that same $5k USD from your Chase bank account to someone overseas. I bet it will cost you a lot more than $0.09  ;) (actually roughly $300 for wire fee and currency exchange)

"No incentive" to use bitcoin is a bit dramatic of a statement. If that's the case, then why are you still here?

There are already a ton of them being used right now as I listed, and many of them free.

This is a very difficult topic and has been the reason for discussion for a long time already. Accepting a transaction in a block actually bloats the time to transact the block over the network quite a bit. Therefore the chances of that block being accepted in the longest chain subsequently go down with every new transaction that's being accepted! Accepting a transaction in a block therefore 'costs' a certain amount - since the miner is risking the whole block reward. There's a proposal to cut down that risk and development is ongoing: http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2d7ofh/technical_discussion_of_gavins_o1_block/ (http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2d7ofh/technical_discussion_of_gavins_o1_block/)

Anyway, how many inputs did that transaction have? They also bloat the needed transaction fee quite a bit ;)

yeah, but are those billions of people running servers propagating transfers?

why not use dogecoin?  doesn't it only cost 1 doge to make a transaction, with each doge worth like 0.002?

It has the 10kb of space set aside for free transactions and another 17k for priority transactions, though... with how many DOGE blocks there are, you really don't have to pay a fee at all (unless perhaps it's an extremely large txn). I'm not sure if this is still the case or not.  I was looking through the source and it seems like the latest code has 26KB reserved for free transactions, priority or otherwise?

I have my dogecoin only set to relay transactions that pay 1 dogecoin every 1kb....  my p2pool rarely has any fees other than my own.

ed: i should preview my stuff more often. sigh.

A temporary problem...

Does that mean, that microtransactions will be fixed by btcdev team??? I think, that it's one of the benefit of cryptocoins.

There is not any "minimum" amount of a fee that you have to pay in order to have your TX confirmed. The fee policy is set by each pool (and solo miner) separately and does vary somewhat from pool to pool. Even if you were to send a small TX with zero fee that is over 1 KB it may still get confirmed by the network.

What happened with the OP is that coinbase is forcing their customers to pay a certain amount of a fee in order to have a greater chance that the TX will be confirmed quickly. They are in effect forcing customers to pay the network to give them a better "customer experience" using coinbase. 

If you have received a whole lot of small transactions, then the fee is larger due to the fact of how any Bitcoin wallet works. More transactions > larger transaction (space-wise) > more fee.

you need offchain tx , onchain is not suit for micro tx

I was wondering if someone would eventually give the right answer. Read this: http://bitcoinfees.com/

This


Do you know what happens when you set things like this to be free in cost?  Incentive to spam with single satoshi transactions = my case in point is Email SPAM!  I for one don't want to lose bitcoin functionality because some warren buffet lackie with 100 grand has nothing better to do than to spam out all BTC addresses with single satoshi transactions and silly comments.  Micropayments model should be solved by the businesses looking to offer the service ala entrepreneurs - this happens like others said...when there is a demand for it by a sizeable group.  

People suck.

If there is ZERO fee then some people will send spam transactions and fill the network with junk as a DOS attack.  The fee does serve a purpose.  

One evil (a working network) vs another (a small 9 cent fee).  Choices.  

i don't know.... bu i'm paynig 0.0001 btc per tx.

The OP has correctly pointed out a flaw in Bitcoin. 

As a method of transferring money, it is not very flexible towards small amounts.  This is very unfortunate because small amounts make up a huge amount of transactions.  There is a whole market out there that bitcoin is immediately excluded from because it is not technologically advanced enough or designed well enough to be able to efficiently send small amounts. 

This is even more ridiculous when considering all the computers that are working towards mining, which in theory is suppose to mean supporting the network and processing transactions, but in reality because of the selfishness and greed of miners turns into actually ignoring transactions that don't have big enough fees attached to them. 

Bitcoin is a great system but also hasn't been designed perfectly. 

http://dcmagnates.com/coinbase-out-to-solve-micro-payments-with-transactionless-transfers/

If it doesn't go out to the blockchain, it's a centralized system. We already have those.

That's crazy, but small payments do cost a lot to send.

Right, Coinbase can definitely solve this problem and so can Bitpay.  If the major players team together and allow cross-micro-transactions than it is a solution.  It won't be true decentralization, but bitcoin itself will always be decentralized even if the players on top of it aren't.  Utlimately, is the Coinbase/Bitpay transactions in their own system an acceptable solution?

i'm paying 0.0001 btc x tx

Of course it's acceptable. We aren't going to take over the world with micro-payments. If I want to tip you 25 cents because I liked your post I'm not helping crush big banks. The big banking establishments don't want my tiny transaction either. This is a solution to a problem that Bitcoin wasn't designed to handle. Clearly Bitcoin isn't for micro or nano payments.

Clearly, the current bitcoin isn't suitable for micro transactions. I think the network just can't handle the transaction volume, and having fees is one way of discouraging dust transactions.

The question is, should it?  And if so, why not fix it?

It's electronic and digital. In theory processing a $.0001 transaction should be as difficult as processing a $1,000,000,000 transaction. I think it's a terrible shame bitcoin wasn't designed to handle any and everything.

I personally believe bitcoin won't take over the world without micro payments.  Because it can't that means a theoretical person in the morning will have to leave his house with two forms of cash, bitcoin for big, another for small. That is just really inefficient and silly.  Why would a payment system that wants to be revolutionary also be so limited?

Bitcoin is to HTTP as Payment Channels are to CSS/Javascript/PHP. Other technologies are being scaffolded upon bitcoin. There is too much momentum behind bitcoin so it is unlikely that any alt will be able to compete for the top tier unit of account.

Users can already make micro-payments for no charge with bitcoin from multiple sources.

 In the future there will be ways of doing so in a decentralized and anonymous manner. Their is nothing technically limiting this, the only reason it isn't being implemented now is because their isn't a large demand for it. To the end user it will all simply be a Bitcoin payment and they won't need to know the complex relationship between the bitcoin core protocol and a micro payment  treechain/sidechain channel .

The concerns in this thread that assume some intrinsic flaw within bitcoin as it cannot support micro payments are unfounded. It is better that high velocity micro transactions are handled within a sidechain/treechain or third party. Have you guys considered the strain on the network and blockchain bloat if trillions of 10 penny transactions were hitting the blockchain per day?

I hear you. I'm not convinced that Bitcoin needs to or should be the only method of exchange. If Bitcoin was adopted by every country in the world gold and silver will still exist and be traded as currency.

I believe you will only need to leave your house with one electronic device and it will solve all of your financial demands. I used to leave my house with a wallet full of cards. My ATM card, credit cards, store discount cards, checks and cash all needed to be available if I needed them. If I stopped by ACE Hardware on the way home I need to have my ACE Rewards card with me. Now there's a phone app called Key Ring that holds all of my cards and it can be scanned at the register. Technology will solve this problem eventually.

Finally, micro-payments can be made with Bitcoin. They just aren't cost effective. So if you still want to make them you can. Nano-payments (or dust transactions) cannot currently be made with Bitcoin. If the need arises that feature could be switched back on but I seriously doubt it ever will be.

All things in life have limitations but some of us want some things to be all encompassing. Unfortunately, life just doesn't work that way.

The nice thing is that since you don't like it, you are free to fork the client and blockchain and do it the way you want.  Then you can see how many people agree with you, and we can see how it all works out.

Let us know when your fork is ready to go so we can see how well it works in practice, particularly since this is a coinbase fee vs a bitcoin fee.

They could even offer that service for dollars, and eliminate the need for Bitcoin entirely.

You can send 5.BTC from your coinbase account to mine with no fees.  Try to send $0.05 , $5.00 or even $5,000 from your account at chase to any other bank, or convert it from USD to Chinese Yan.

You can also send that $0.24 with no tx fee or for that matter $0.005 if you wanted.  If the app that you are using doesn't allow you to change it, that is not a problem with the block chain rath with the app you are using.

I was thinking the same exact thing.  It is all good if you want to move money in their network but outside of that the fees are high and your options are limited.  Today in a world driven by technology and business, makes the future of Bitcoin look very bright.  The old and current banking models do not compare to Bitcoins ability to benefit it users and evolve in a future with a thriving free market.  Which is where I think we're headed.

with 0.0001 fee counts as instant. why 0.0002 ?
it would cost you $0.04
still for microtransactions, put something like 1 cent. it wont be "forever" che confirmation but yes a few hours i hope

The OP was using coinbase to send his TX and they "choose" how much of a fee to include for you. They will usually include a TX fee that will more or less ensure the TX will get confirmed in the next block. IIRC coinbase will usually/sometimes cover the TX fee when sending from coinbase but I am unsure what their exact policy on this is.

I'm pretty sure I can transfer my 5€ to an other account in Europe for free. The currency conversions are bad still though.

wonder why almost all places have a minimum amount you can use your debit or credit card for? because of transaction fees that are a lot higher than $0.09

Like others have stated, the transaction fee only has to be 0.0001 right now to usually be included in the following block, which is currently just under 5 cents. Sending 24 cents is what I would consider to be a very small transaction, even for microtransactions. I usually regard Microtransactions to be 50 cents to $3. However, if you actually wanted to send lets say 2 cents to someone (MICRO-Micro-transaction) you simply just don't add a fee. I've sent transactions in the past without adding any fee and the transaction usually takes 1-1.5 days to be included in a block, but at least it still makes it eventually.

try electrum with 0 fee and you will be able to send your bitcoins free

What the OP really should have done, as others should do when they are sending this small of transactions is to try to do the transaction "off chain" to a merchant/person that has the same BTC safekeeping service as you. These types of microtransactions really are bloating up the blockchain and are not very cost efficient to send (if the OP had the ability to not include a fee, and did not include one then the TX would likely have never confirmed).

If the OP had spent his coins somewhere that also uses coinbase and sent coins to that user's coinbase account then he would have not paid any TX fee and the transaction would have confirmed 100% instantly.

Coinbase to coinbase there is no fee.

True that you can create such 0 fee transaction, but it is likely to never get confirmed.

Bank of America to Bank of America there is no fee, either.

Bitcoin has no advantage here.

Minimum balance to open an account?
Minimum balance to avoid account service fees?

OP was complaining about transferring from Coinbase to somewhere not Coinbase and complaining that Chase is better because he can transfer from Chase to Chase without a fee.  His comparison is flawed and I suspect he did that just to troll and create this thread.  It was just being pointed out that if you make an equivalent comparison (Coinbase to Coinbase) then, just like with his Chase account, there is no fee.

Sorry but I think the OP has a point. I think the fees should be proportionate to the money being transferred maybe multiplied by the time to confirm. I'm not a mathematician but there must be someone to workout a formulae.

Lets all be thankful that coinbase covers the fees over 1mBTC, which is less than a dollar and has no fee. In fact, maybe it would make sense for a flat .1% fee on all transactions?

That's how it works. It is one of the reasons why collecting dust is so painful for those that do.

If your coins haven't travelled much then this isn't usually an issue.

yeah, it's true.
But, for what you send $ 0.24? This really does not make sense. You want to buy a lemon with $ 0.24?
if you compare the bank with bitcoin. whether the bank can send $ 0.24? how much will it cost?

The fees should be proportionate to the amount of work that it takes to confirm a transaction. Generally speaking it does not take any more work to confirm a 10,000 BTC transaction then it takes to confirm a .005 BTC transaction (assuming the same number of inputs and outputs), so why should the user pay more if the miners are doing the same amount of work?

Partially agreed.  How ever it doesn't take less processing power to move 10000 BTC versus .01 BTC, its roughly the same.  So I would expect that if you have to move $0.24 either don't because $0.09 to get it confirmed in a timely manner is too much, or put less into the tx fee and see what happens.

0.0001 is ok (in all online wallets) at this moment (with the price of btc),
Maybe, in a future, this fee will decrease (when bitcoin touch 2k - 5k usd) to 0.00005 , i don't know

Microtransactions is possible for btc, yes. I read about man, who send 0.0001 btc! Great to see, that i can to do that too :)

I almost never pay fees, unless someone needs money right away.

 Quark did solve that problem 12 months ago ha ha

; D

Damn

If they don't charge, then bitcoin will have lot of trouble paying miners.

Banks and CC companies, even paypal charges higher than this. Just saying.

You should be happy you are allowed to use the bitcoin network for such shitty amounts.

Bitcoin payment isn't really viable for restaurant type establishment.

Imagine paying for a cup of coffee and paying 0.005 transaction fee on 5 dollars transaction. The owner might decide it is not a good business sense to wait for 30 mins for every customer transaction to confirm.

That's the lowest fee I have seen imo. You can't expect everything to be free right?

That's what BTC system is relying on ..

This is exactly true. There is no reason to pay the miners more just because you are transacting a large amount of money. It is also not fair to the miners if they are paid less then the market rate for smaller transactions. If this kind of system were to be implemented then it would be very difficult to get smaller transactions confirmed and small transactions would be given lower priority by the miners.

And $0.00 to move BTC200k???  ;D

http://www.coindesk.com/194993-btc-transaction-147m-mystery-and-speculation/

Why not set the fees to 0.00001 BTC (1000 Satoshis) instead of 0.0002 (20000 Satoshis)?
Had to wait times up to some hours but it confirmed mostly. If the amounts are that small, then it's likely not too important to confirm quickly.

You can adjust it to any amount. Anyways, that's still cheaper than any other money transfer method out there!

Hopefully this will change in the future, if Bitcoin's value increases and the transaction fee remains the same, it could become more costly to send micro transactions like this.

This was likely because the coins had not been moved in such a long time. The longer it has been since the last time a coin has been spent, the higher priority a TX that contains the subject coins. The TX was also very small in terms of the size on the blockchain.

No large amounts of Bitcoins are considered High priority transactions
While their is a relation to coin-age these type of transactions are large and significant so there is no need to pay a transaction fee.

you can try electrum and set a 0 fee
but it may take some time to get received
 ::)

I am not saying they are high priority transactions today, I am saying that if the TX fee was based on the amount being transferred then large transactions would receive higher priority because the miners would receive a higher fee for the transaction.

It is important to note that the individual miners (or pools when a pool finds a block) are the ones who set the policy as to which TXs are confirmed in a found block.

If the size of the TX (in terms of space on the blockchain) is small enough then there is no reason for the miners to force the sender to pay a fee. Also if the sender was somehow associated with a mining pool then they can simply have the pool confirm the TX when the pool finds it's next block.

As time goes on and BTC is no longer plagued by 10% inflation to pay for security, we will see transaction fees need to rise to maintain a reasonable level of security.

The total TX fees will need to rise, not the TX fee per transaction. When more people use bitcoin more often, the number of transactions per second will rise, causing more overall TX fees.

Set your fees lower. On a side note, why in the world are you sending 0.24¢ to begin with?

So if i send 5 BTC it cost 2 BTC? nuff said  :D
great Logic man  :-X

NO thats not the point the point is that you cant send small amounts because the fee will be more than you are sending.

I disagree. A while ago, we took my brother to Ocean Blue Sushi (http://oceanbluesushica.com). I forgot what the dollar amount was, but with tip it came to 136.2 mBTC. The Mycelium mobile wallet used the default fee of 0.1 mBTC, which is less than 0.1%. My payment was confirmed in a few seconds by the network, which was reported to the app (Coinbase?) on the restaurant's tablet.

So instead of the restaurant paying about 10c to process your credit card (and you getting about 1c in Credit Card points), you paid about 5c on top of the bill.  Via coinbase, they pay 0% fees to sell the BitCoin to them instantly for $$ (first $1M) 
No wonder businesses are interested, 0% chance of chargeback, and the customer pays the fees.     Unless the businesses gives you a discount for BitCoin purchases, it's not to your benefit though.

This (transaction fee based on storage space/transmission cost of the tx) is a flaw in the Bitcoin protocol. 

We pay transaction fees to miners (at least in theory) to secure the network.  But it is not the storage space or transmission cost that is what makes the network require security. 

It seemed to make sense under the initial using-spare-compute-power model that the expense of securing the network was largely a bandwidth and storage expense borne in common by everybody - but that is not how it has turned out.  The expense of securing the network is in hardware for hashing farms and in power bills.  bandwidh and storage expense is not the major expense of providing what we're paying for, and charging people for bandwidth and storage is an inaccurate allocation of resources.  The people who secure the blockchain - ie, the miners - are paying the major expenses associated with security themselves when they buy the hardware and pay their power bills. 

What we are trying to secure is the value on the blockchain - and therefore IMO the transaction fees to secure it ought to be based on the value transferred. 

We need to move to an accurate economic model because an inaccurate one (such as we have now) cannot endure in competition with an accurate one.

Point taken.

Although these small amounts are really just noise compared to the 15% tip I left.

The costs associated with accepting credit cards are much higher then that. As a general rule the actual cost of processing a credit card transaction (before charge-backs are taken into consideration) is roughly 3%. If you have good credit then you can likely get 1% back from cash back and/or rewards points from your credit card company. This makes it so you essentially pay at the very least 2% higher price because a merchant accepts credit cards. I don't think that many merchants process more then $1 million in bitcoin transactions so accepting bitcoin is more or less free for them.

Dude you could do it for 0.0001 I think coinbase limit is 0.0002

If it doesn't confirm It means the other person at the receiving address cannot spend it?

The topic should be It costs 5c to send 25c.... Dont use coinbase, I dont get why you would use coinbase? You may aswell use Paypal and spend MUCH more.

0.0001 is the tx fee , Coinbase charges more as they are helping the miners and feeding the ecosystem.

Bitcoin relies heavily on the miners, they keep BTC strong. So if miners are not being paid out, BTC will die. The fee is necessary.

The minimum for per transaction is ฿0.01 on Okcoin and the fee is ฿0.0001.  ::)

Nope my friend .. i'm just make a Chaff about his opinion's  :D

Those 0.09$ are the miner fee. If miners stop working then its the deadend for btc. Respect to miners.

lol... earlier I used to pay the default transaction fee for sending my coins. Once I paid as much as BTC0.001 to send BTC0.0015. Then I searched around a bit and found that we can change the "default" value in Blockchain.info. After that, for smaller transactions, I usually pay BTC0.0001 or less. Never use the "default fee" option. Always use the "custom fee" button.  ;D

i dont think i've ever paid a transaction fee using coinbase.  is this new?

If you bothered to read the thread you would see that the OP had used coinbase who forced him to pay the fee. He did not have any choice. Since coinbase controls the OP's coins and the coins will not necessarily be sent from specific inputs that the OP received he has very little control over what the cost to send his TX would be.

Just be glad it costs 9 cents to send $100M of bitcoin too.

i'll pay you the 9 cents if you send me $100M in btc.