Bitcoin Forum

Hi everyone, I only registered to increase the pressure on the bitcoin community with this topic.

Recently I started investing into bitcoin, but nowadays bitcoin seems useless to do small payments or donations, since the transaction fees cost me like 0.003 BTC which is 7.69 eur. (I am not willing to pay such high fees)

If this is not gonna get fixed, bitcoin's growth will be slowed down and less people will be making transactions,
bitcoin will become just an investment commodity and not an everyday currency.
Or eventually the lack of transactions will reduce the value of bitcoin, until 0.003 BTC won't be that much money, which will self-fix the problem. But in that case, many investors will be pissed including me.

I have read about segwit that it could possibly fix this issue and that only ~30% of miners are willing to accept segwit for now.

• Is there any plan for an important fix of the block size capacity or something that will reduce the fees?
• How do you feel about this?
• What can we do about it?

Even if bitcoin becomes more like gold, it still is very worthwhile in exchanging between alts and gaining value from that.

What can we do? Buy cloud mining power in a mining pool that wants what you want.

You can also run nodes and support what you want


Or buy your own mining hardware and mine in a pool that supports what you want.

This will only be solved through mining power I think. Many people already discuss this issue here daily so you know.

I see that as a pretty weak argument.  Any other cryptocurrency could be a "master" like that in different circumstances and/or in the future.
True.  The problem is that it never ends up happening because most big miners have huge self-interests and most small miners don't actually care that much about scaling. 

The reason I say that is because the share of hashrate hasn't changed very significantly since each pool started signalling for their preferred solution.

---

The main things that speak are compromises and code, and I don't think some of the people in the discussion are as good at either as they'd like to think.

There are two alternatives, the hard fork, which "Bitcoin Unlimited" (it's the SegWit opponent) would try to force a solution by splitting Bitcoin in two and the another possibility is the biggest part of Bitcoin community endorsing one side, which seems impossible as until now the percentages are very distant to become a common opinion.

I think most people feel very sad about it, because they don't want to pay high fees, but it's being very good for miners as they are enjoying the high fees we need to pay to them.

The little fishes can do nothing about it, only the big businesses have right of decision here.

This is truly a non statement. Buying yourself into cloud mining makes you nothing more than a slave of the pool that you have given your precious coins to. It's just you having a contract or hashshare that represents a certain hight of hashpower, and that's it.

Doesn't change anything in current situation.

Also doesn't change anything in current situation, plus it's a far too expensive practice for someone just interested in lower transaction fees.

UASF.

Even though segwit has lower hashpower acceptance if you look at nodes approval rate you'll find that bitcoin unlimited is not even close right now. And I believe that nodes are the most accurate way to actually measure it because nodes represent actual service providers in the bitcoin sphere instead of just a bunch of people that have hardware and cheap electricity.

The transaction fees are indeed ridiculously high. Try to use a web wallet and store low amounts of bitcoin, the fees they charge is usually less than the miners fee. The UASF is coming up so, at least we can put an end to this.

There are a ton of plans and concepts that have been put forwards and it really just comes down to the willingness of the mining community (and some of the users) to actually try and fix a lot of what has been happening.
I don't like having high fees but at the same time I don't know if it is worth caring about anymore because half the community feels brain-dead retarded and the two options we have for fixing the block size (BU and Segwit) kinda leave only Segwit as a viable option, because BU has a pants-on-head retarded dev team that's trying to secure and consolidate power.
Just make your opinion known, vote in polls, if you can start mining so you have some of the hashing power.

Some cloud mining services allow you to choose which pools you mine at.  This would make sense for people who have moral principles on this debate but don't want to mine at home.
Not much, but it can be a signal of strength for each group.  Often people will count the amount of UASF nodes, for example.
UASF requires a lot of support which it doesn't have.  Not too likely.

UASF solves this problem with greedy miners on AUG 1, we will not have long to wait   ;)

At least we must be patience for 6 months later to see UASF will have happened in the future. But I've heard some people said that the UASF will forked the chain of bitcoin like what will be happened if the bitcoin unlimited was winning the scaling vote.

Lmao not happening.

Segwit2x or big block fork. Core will be left behind.

last fees : 0,0006 BTC (320 sat./B) and 0,00016 BTC (86 sat./B).
proof : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1417123.msg19393385#msg19393385

confirmed with 6 block after 45min.


no problem, here.
use a real software or a complet node if your software can not calculate the real fee of a transaction.

 ::)

This seems to be exactly why so many people are investing in altcoins now. Nearly all of the top 100 altcoins have skyrocketed in the last few months. (I'm secretly looking for the altcoins that have not yet skyrocketed and investing in those currently)

Are you sure you didn't use a transaction accelerator for this? Unless your transaction was super big or has inputs that are super old i don't see this happening. I've seen people send with 150 sats/byte and still not getting confirmations for days. You might just be a lucky bastard...  :P

Doing this is risky af right now. You're basically risking not getting your coins to the destination for a few months, and this means that your transaction will stay unconfirmed when the UASF happens. Maybe that's bad, maybe it's okay. But the safest thing to do is to just hold your coins in a secure wallet.

And what do you mean by "real software"? Are you saying all the rest of the wallets which say you need to use 400sats/byte is not real software?

Never tell newbies to buy cloud mining power. We all know that most of the cloud mining services are scams and you may get one or more newbies pissed off because they lost all their bitcoins following your advice

I just know that 86 sat/byte is sufficient as bitcoin fee, due to pay 120-200 sat/byte but still have to wait for hours or days to be confirmed. High fees become a major obstacle for bitcoin development as people will avoid use it to do some transaction and prefer to use fiat money or altcoins which has low fees.
The thing is, to solve this problem depend on consensus from the miners to agree on one solution but they don't want to, because they enjoy huge profits from bunch of high fees.

Paying for high transaction fees is only optional but my transaction was immediately confirmed after a few minutes for the transactions are completely faster than before, i dont maybe why some people are complaining about this but if you want transactions and small payments to get through bitcoin network we must implement a bitcoin scaling solution as a consensus. I dont know why some people are complaining about transaction fees and dont want to activate Segwit or UASF but whether it is activated or not it's fine cause the blockchain can quickly transaction within minutes and the amount of my transaction is 0.004 something.

No they are not? The Bitcoin block confirmation time is still 10 minutes just like before. The only difference is that there are a LOT more transactions waiting for confirmation because blocks are full and people's transactions are left outside, waiting for a moment when the miner will accept their transactions if they pay enought on fees.

TLDR: the transactions did not get any faster. They are actually getting slower and slower and there is no comparison to what it used to be before.

But they want a solution... UASF will probably get activated day 1st of August and there are already devs aiming to fix the scalability issues with the Segwit2x. But we need time to make it right and don't mess with Bitcoin.

It is a real concern when we see the price of transaction increases and blockchain has recently stopped allowing users to send many transactions at once, now the only solution seems to be to download the core software and keep syncing ,it make take ages if you are having a shitty connection,hope there is any alternatives as i am looking for one.

At 2017 NY scalling conference, considerable amount of Bitcoin business, miners (over 80%) and individuals from both camps agreed to solve the Bitcoin scalling with SegWit2x:
https://medium.com/@DCGco/bitcoin-scaling-agreement-at-consensus-2017-133521fe9a77

SegWit2x Calendar:
https://segwit2x.github.io/

work on SegWit2x code:
https://github.com/btc1/bitcoin/

I think that the price of Bitcoin is not the real issue right now because the transaction fee is not that expensive to spend. The most I would pay for a confirmed transaction would be somewhere like $0.30 and the transaction would get confirmed quickly.
The real issue would be downloading the whole Blockchain because it’s getting larger.

It is a problem and it needs to be addressed.


It is true that it's currently very inconevnient to transfer funds. I have to limit the amount of transactions i spend every day because i can't afford to lose so much in fees anymore like before. But buying cloud mining or mining software? What? That's completely nonsense. Even if you have hardware, you can't confirm your own transactions/you have a very low chance of confirming your own transactions.

if i read the changelog of every wallet ... i notice only "a few" with a constant correction about the fee calculation.

SPV Schildbach Android Wallet is one, Bitcoin Core is the second.
So, the problem of fake wallet is that they use a "simple formula" based of average fees on block.
but, they don't calculate the weight of the transaction and mitigate this formula.

that why users get stuck in MEMpool.
real wallet follow the rules.

other explanation (and more accurate) : users emit transaction without wait the full synchro. of the SPV or Full Blockchain wallet.

Just want to say I totally agree with OP here.  I wanted to send around $60 over to my Yobit account...the low-priority option on Mycelium is asking for around $8.  No way in hell I'm going to pay that.  Those bitcoins are going to stay right where they are.  It's unbelievable.  Merchants need to start accepting things like doge and whatnot.  Then I'd gladly spend crypto for stuff.  Ugh.  This is a nightmare.

indeed, high fee of bitcoin transaction is mainly because the large flow of the unconfirmed transaction caused by the popularity. there are no way to dispense that, that's why we should go with some of the altcoins so that we can use as bitcoin's alternative, decrease the burden and increase the competition each other.

bitcoin fee is never been able to evade, you know the reward for miners are ever decreasing.

If you were a miner yourself would you let anyone to reduce the fees while you are earning thousands of dollars daily just by collecting the block fees?
From a miner's perspective everything is fine and according to the plan, only solution is 10+TX/s. but I somehow doubt if that fixes anything since miners will be able to mine their own transactions ans cause the fees to increase again. even though we're not yet near to breaking point and bitcoin still has a long way to go before it breaks.