1. Yeah so that's why I can send a tx with 1k satoshi as fee and confirmed in 20 hours...
If your transaction size is 200bytes and you paid 1000 satoshi, probably in a few days.
4. Then why don't them pay those satoshi as fees... My first transaction made ever consisted 1301xx satoshi inputs and a single 100000 satoshi output. The standard transaction fee was 30000 but it ended up charging me the extra 1xx satoshi without changing to me
Depends on the client really. Unfortunately, certain wallet clients do not care and just use the remaining as change.
But if I were to enforce the 54600 satoshi rule, everyone would be crying about how the wallet client used ~34600 satoshi as a fee while I am only trying to send $4.
5. Then that's why there're altcoins with lower transaction fees. You may send a cent in the dogecoin network paying only 0.025 cent as fee.
Acceptance rate. If I were to be wanting to use micro transactions, sure I can use Dogecoin or some other coin. But the acceptance rate of Dogecoin is so low and I have to undergo the hassle to converting Bitcoin to Dogecoin. Dogecoin is extremely volatile for that matter.
6. I don't trust those services actually, because I can't have control to the keys... That's why I prefer direct payment...
Neither do I, but that helps with faucet saving the transaction fees, user saving the transaction fee and ultimately, lower size occupied on the actual chain
The ultimate solution could be increasing the block size, however it is not recommended as it will increase the required bandwidth of nodes and the storage space used by the blockchain.
Definitely. I have to use my same old argument. The block size increase wouldn't affect most of the user since most of them:
1. Uses SPV client.
2. Have plenty of bandwidth
3. Have plenty of space.
4. Can enable pruning.
Blockchain spam can be caused by a variety of things. Faucet is only a small portion of that. This solution wouldn't be the most practical one.