The top 4 mining pools (who control 60% of the hash power) could come together right now and say we're charging a 2% transaction fee. Pay it or your Tx will be declined. If other miners accept Txes that don't pay the fee, your block will be declined and orphaned.
This couldn't happen with a decentralized currency, but the fact is bitcoin is very centralized.
That's a good point. If mining were more decentralized, then transaction fees would tend to settle on a market price, as it could be more profitable for a minor to accept a larger number of transactions with small fees, than a few with large fees. At the present time, minors don't really care about transaction fees, because 99% of their income comes from the block reward. Right, if it's decentralized and you don't include the tx to pick up the fees, someone else will. The fact that there's only a few organizations that run the network, they can come together and agree on rules. Right now miners DON'T have incentive to do this, because they benefit more by making btc more popular and having the price go up. But at some point it's going to be more profitable to force heavy fees onto people to use the network. The big miners are essentially visa/mastercard. They control the network and have the ability to set fees. |
|
|
|
The block reward is what miners get paid to process transactions. fees are just icing on the cake.
That is true today, a quick scan of a few recent blocks show that transaction fees are about 1/200 of the block reward. However, the block reward will decrease in the future, and presumably the transaction fees (per block) will increase, to the point where they will become a significant part. In other words, time will eventually solve this problem. Time actually increases the problem. The lower the block reward, the more in Tx fees are needed to make up the difference. When the block reward's lower, miners will be more likely to force people to pay Tx fees, and high ones. The top 4 mining pools (who control 60% of the hash power) could come together right now and say we're charging a 2% transaction fee. Pay it or your Tx will be declined. If other miners accept Txes that don't pay the fee, your block will be declined and orphaned. This couldn't happen with a decentralized currency, but the fact is bitcoin is very centralized. |
|
|
|
I don't understand. Who is a "victim"? You mean someone who bought, then panic sold below their purchase price? If that is the victim then they are also the perpetrator and should be arrested.  Honestly, I don't know how people lose money with bitcoin unless they do stupid things that would lose them money in any financial transaction. I have been trading in things for decades and I have never seen anything that comes close to the explosive growth in value of bitcoin. What are you talking about. There's plenty of things that exploded in value. Like Oculus rift, invented 2012, sold for billions in 2014. |
|
|
|
|
So basically, this is the same as using your credit card to buy something, selling your bitcoin at an exchange, then using that money to pay your credit card bill when it comes, except you're paying a middleman a fee to do it, and you have to risk the middleman ripping you off (which is ALWAYS a risk when it comes to this).
|
|
|
|
|
You kidding?
That's like saying the people who invested into the tech bubble should be compensated.
This is what happens when people buy shit that they have zero understanding of.
|
|
|
|
|
I could generate a 12345678 address in < a day with my GPU, but oclvanitygen makes my computer unusable while it's running.
|
|
|
|
blocks are only on average 10% filled. we should NOT be changing the protocol to feed greedy miners.
they are already denying transactions to force fee's. we should STOP that practice.
miners jobs are to process transactions. the REWARD is their wage. miners should not deny transactions because that should NOT be their job, and they should definitely NOT be given a bonus ( a fee ) as a prize for their practices.
This is pretty much the only response so far that sounds intelligent. I agree 100%. It's like a waiter/waitress refusing to serve you because you are a bad tipper. This would be okay, except that this isn't the food industry. Transactions should all have equal priority. Maybe all future blocks should meet the following conditions ( as well as current protocols) to be a valid block... if there are >250kb worth of unconfirmed transactions then block size must (roughly) equal 250kb it's as simple as that. Why aren't we enforcing that? The miner's fee was meant to reward miners once the network got really popular and busy. As opposed to the miners sending small blocks so they get in there first with the valid block. You can easily fill up a block with 250 KB worth of your own transactions rather then accept feeless transactions from other people. A lot of people are also making assumptions that may apply if mining is decentralized, but fact is, there's 4 major players who control the majority of the hash power of the network. blocks are only on average 10% filled. we should NOT be changing the protocol to feed greedy miners.
they are already denying transactions to force fee's. we should STOP that practice.
miners jobs are to process transactions. the REWARD is their wage. miners should not deny transactions because that should NOT be their job, and they should definitely NOT be given a bonus ( a fee ) as a prize for their practices.
It's capitalism at work. If bitcoin actually grew big, you can bet your ass there'd be visa/mastercards of the bitcoin world charging a % transaction fee or they'll reject it. Miners jobs are to make money for themselves. Nobody invested millions into mining hardware to process transactions for free for other people. Get your facts straight. I understand you're one of the delusional ones who doesn't see the realities of the world, but this is it. How could you possibly say that it would miners would be doing this "for free"? Most of their profit comes from the block rewards, not the fees. Yes, and to claim the block reward you don't need to include any transactions. Including feeless transactions is working for free. |
|
|
|
blocks are only on average 10% filled. we should NOT be changing the protocol to feed greedy miners.
they are already denying transactions to force fee's. we should STOP that practice.
miners jobs are to process transactions. the REWARD is their wage. miners should not deny transactions because that should NOT be their job, and they should definitely NOT be given a bonus ( a fee ) as a prize for their practices.
It's capitalism at work. If bitcoin actually grew big, you can bet your ass there'd be visa/mastercards of the bitcoin world charging a % transaction fee or they'll reject it. Miners jobs are to make money for themselves. Nobody invested millions into mining hardware to process transactions for free for other people. Get your facts straight. I understand you're one of the delusional ones who doesn't see the realities of the world, but this is it. |
|
|
|
|
If they were planning on jailing him do you think they'd say "Mark, please come to the US so we can throw you in jail?"
Hell no, they'd try to bait him here under the pretense of something else.
|
|
|
|
APRIL FOOLS HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
no?
It's reported by the WSJ. It's 100% legit. |
|
|
|
A brain wallet and an encrypted paper wallet have the same problem. If you die and no one knows your password, the BTC are lost forever. Unencrypted wallets stored securely in your home are adequate for 99% of people. We're usually pretty good at securing things physically.
If you die do you really give a shit what happens to your BTC? |
|
|
|
|
It's certainly not impossible.
If intel made an ASIC chip for SHA-256, it would make all these other chips being made right now irrelevant.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, in that case it's pretty easy for government(s) to set rules on transactions.
Most of the big mining facilities are in developed 1st world countries, so it'd be pretty easy to force them to comply, or if they don't the govt can seize their hardware.
|
|
|
|
|
Like let's say someone has 75% of the overall mining power.
Could they reject other miners' valid blocks? The 75%'s blockchain will always be longer then anyone else's, so would it cause all other miners' blocks to be orphaned?
And they could essentially set rules on the transactions, and set a minimum Tx fee to get a Tx included in the blockchain.
|
|
|
|
i'll create 1AreYouListeningFor2100BTC123~12h  Try with no illegal characters next time  I made this just to be a troll:
1Niggerw15VezU6rA7jRBuJt9ceg9VL1jh
I also have this one that I never used yet:
1234567pejEviURDJmVVGVVyB34XY37bG4
Hmm, I have no problem trusting you made these as these should take around 2-6hours to generate on an average home computer.  If you want the first one on the poll ill have to get an admin's perspective on that word first seeing how nigger isn't a censored word, I don't see an issue. |
|
|
|
I made this just to be a troll: 1Niggerw15VezU6rA7jRBuJt9ceg9VL1jh It has outgoing sends so that's proof that it's a real address https://blockchain.info/address/1Niggerw15VezU6rA7jRBuJt9ceg9VL1jhIf you want me to prove ownership, send me .0002 and give me an address to send .0001 back to. I also have this one that I never used yet: 1234567pejEviURDJmVVGVVyB34XY37bG4 Can prove ownership in the same way. |
|
|
|
|
What the fuck? Is this guy really this stupid or is he trolling?
Why would you put a black border around the supposed "paper" when you're photoshopping it in.
Real paper wouldn't have that.
a 12 year old could photoshop a better picture.
|
|
|
|
|
Why the hell would any MMORPG buy bitcoin to "back" their in game currency?
If anything that just causes legal problems for them.
Officially selling in game currency is against the TOS of most MMORPGs. It shields the company running it from having to worry about things like mediating scams. If you report that you got scammed doing a currency trade they can just ban YOU for violation of the TOS. If they have an official game money <-> real money conversion it's going to cause all kinds of problems.
|
|
|
|
ah one of those too good to be true things
Well, it's certainly plausible that he had a heart attack  |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
