Bitcoin Forum
November 21, 2017, 03:10:42 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Transaction Fees are SPIKING !  (Read 5298 times)
shinratensei_
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 770



View Profile
February 22, 2017, 11:53:52 PM
 #21

All time high for the transaction fees : https://bitcoinfees.info/

Now more than 50 cts for the 3 blocks fees !

The network is BLOATED and more people want to confirm transactions on the network.



That's why the bitcoin not friendly to be the massive adoption. The network of bitcoin is really terrible.

SegWit, BU stuck and the bitcoin network gets hurt. to delivery, my transaction in this condition must pay a dollar. The consensus is preventing the improvement of bitcoin network.

██
█║█
║║║
║║║
█║█
██
'BTC MULTI-WALLET SOON'
▬▬▬▬ Download WHITEPAPER ▬▬▬▬

                    ▄██▄
                  ▄██████▄
                ▄██████████
              ▄██████████▀   ▄▄
            ▄██████████▀   ▄████▄
          ▄██████████▀    ████████▄
         ██████████▀      ▀████████
         ▀███████▀   ▄███▄  ▀████▀   ▄█▄
    ▄███▄  ▀███▀   ▄███████▄  ▀▀   ▄█████▄
  ▄███████▄      ▄██████████     ▄█████████
  █████████    ▄██████████▀    ▄██████████▀
   ▀█████▀   ▄██████████▀    ▄██████████▀
     ▀▀▀   ▄██████████▀    ▄██████████▀
          ██████████▀    ▄██████████▀
          ▀███████▀      █████████▀
            ▀███▀   ▄██▄  ▀█████▀
                  ▄██████▄  ▀▀▀
                  █████████
                   ▀█████▀
                     ▀▀▀
e i d o o
██

███▀▀
▐▐▌
▐▌
▐▌
▐▐▌
███▄▄
▀▀███
▐▌▌
▐▌
▐▌
▐▌▌
▄▄███
1511233842
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511233842

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511233842
Reply with quote  #2

1511233842
Report to moderator
1511233842
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511233842

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511233842
Reply with quote  #2

1511233842
Report to moderator
1511233842
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511233842

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511233842
Reply with quote  #2

1511233842
Report to moderator
Join ICO Now A blockchain platform for effective freelancing
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1511233842
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511233842

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511233842
Reply with quote  #2

1511233842
Report to moderator
1511233842
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511233842

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511233842
Reply with quote  #2

1511233842
Report to moderator
franky1
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1862



View Profile
February 23, 2017, 12:27:06 AM
 #22

lets imaging we had a onchain block boost at 2012 due to something satoshi was thinking about back in 2010.

then we had another onchain block size change that was lets say the equivalent to doubling at each block reward having event..
(you can argue and cry all you like about timing and amounts. but just go with this scenario)

now imagine we slap anyone that thinks larger fee's are good and instead kept fee's at lets say 5cents
now imagine DEFLATION didnt move at 10* or 100* every 4 years but instead just 2*(yea low number to play devils advocate), just to keep the reward and bitcoin price on par.

lets see how much pools will earn over the next 40ish years per block



oh look in 36 years+ the pools will be getting over $127K for ~10 minutes work all without having to push users into spending anything over 5 cents a tx
shockingly positive, i know! but i hope it opens your mind to do some scenarios of your own. without being biased to push for LN or pushing to increase fee's to rule out developing countries from using bitcoins mainnet as bitcoins end game

also noting that world wide stats of fiat = people only spend fiat 41 times a month average. (convert to bitcoin tx count) 226,578,732 people to use bitcoin mainnet
yes there are some users that will want to spend 20 times a day.. and that is where they will VOLUNTARILY use LN as a NICHE side service.
but those that only spend less (once a week/month). will use bitcoins mainnet, as they see no benefit of LN

which if you look at world fiat spending stats. reveals that the IRREGULAR spenders vs REGULAR spenders ratio... covers ALOT more people
which if you put that ratio to the bitcoin mainnet tx count and do some maths of a months tx count.
means that in 36 years.. when technology naturally grows and nodes NATURALLY CAN COPE. and LN being just a side service. will all allow over 1billion users to happily hold bitcoin and spend regularly or irregularly without costing large fee's

now here is a little extra thing to think about.
bitcoin will not be a one world currency for 7-10billion people..
for many reasons.
imagine bitcoin only grabs 5% of the worlds population (relax, that is still making bitcoin one of the top 5 "nations" statistically)
you will see that bitcoin, in rational and natural growth, without having to push for large fee's, without having to force people to use LN. without having to halt bitcoin growth.. CAN COPE!!

I DO NOT TRADE OR ACT AS ESCROW ON THIS FORUM EVER.
Don't take any information given on this forum on face value. Please do your own due diligence & respect what is written here as both opinion & information gleaned from experience. If you wish to seek legal FACTUAL advice, then seek the guidance of a LEGAL specialist.
Blawpaw
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1064

Bitcoin Enthusiast and Blockchain Enterpreneur


View Profile
February 24, 2017, 02:35:07 PM
 #23

Wow... you just realized it now? Yes, the transaction fee cost is heavily increasing because the blocks are getting full. and it is a real threat to the network. Unless we find an alternative to the Blocksize increase or go for it, they will increase to the point it will be unbearable to use Bitcoin.
lionheart78
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1134



View Profile
February 24, 2017, 02:57:04 PM
 #24

Wow... you just realized it now? Yes, the transaction fee cost is heavily increasing because the blocks are getting full. and it is a real threat to the network. Unless we find an alternative to the Blocksize increase or go for it, they will increase to the point it will be unbearable to use Bitcoin.

I guess they will rush to patch the solution when majority of Bitcoin users turned their back and put their interest to a more scalable cryptocurrency.  When they see that people who got dismayed is not supporting Bitcoin anymore and no one is insane enough to buy BTC with this disability feature.  I hope developer does not need that kind of scenario to come into consensus on the possible fix of Bitcoin block size problem.

           ▄▄███████▄▄
        ▄███▀▀
▄▄▄▄    ▀▄
     ▄▄█████████████▄▄  ▀▄
  ▄▀▀██▀           ▀▀██▄▄▀▄
▄▀  ██                 ▀██
  ██       ▀▀█▀▀         █
█▀        █ █ █        ▄█▀▄
▀▄         █ █ █       ▄█  █
 ██         █▄▄▄█      ▄█  ▄▀
  ██▄                ▄█▀  ▄▀
  ▀▄▀██▄▄          ▄█▀  ▄▀
   ▀▄ ▀▀███▄▄▄▄▄▄█████▀▀
     ▀▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
.UTRUST.▀████████▄
  ▀███████▄
    ▀██████▄
      ▀██████
       ▀█████
        ▀████▄
         █████
          ▀███
           ███
           ▀██
            ██
             █
             █
●  Download WHITEPAPER  ●
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ ▼ ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
facebook      twitter      slack
▀████████▄
  ▀███████▄
    ▀██████▄
      ▀██████
       ▀█████
        ▀████▄
         █████
          ▀███
           ███
           ▀██
            ██
             █
             █
nyanhtet
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 434


Bawga


View Profile
February 24, 2017, 03:03:42 PM
 #25

lets imaging we had a onchain block boost at 2012 due to something satoshi was thinking about back in 2010.

then we had another onchain block size change that was lets say the equivalent to doubling at each block reward having event..
(you can argue and cry all you like about timing and amounts. but just go with this scenario)

now imagine we slap anyone that thinks larger fee's are good and instead kept fee's at lets say 5cents
now imagine DEFLATION didnt move at 10* or 100* every 4 years but instead just 2*(yea low number to play devils advocate), just to keep the reward and bitcoin price on par.

lets see how much pools will earn over the next 40ish years per block



oh look in 36 years+ the pools will be getting over $127K for ~10 minutes work all without having to push users into spending anything over 5 cents a tx
shockingly positive, i know! but i hope it opens your mind to do some scenarios of your own. without being biased to push for LN or pushing to increase fee's to rule out developing countries from using bitcoins mainnet as bitcoins end game

also noting that world wide stats of fiat = people only spend fiat 41 times a month average. (convert to bitcoin tx count) 226,578,732 people to use bitcoin mainnet
yes there are some users that will want to spend 20 times a day.. and that is where they will VOLUNTARILY use LN as a NICHE side service.
but those that only spend less (once a week/month). will use bitcoins mainnet, as they see no benefit of LN

which if you look at world fiat spending stats. reveals that the IRREGULAR spenders vs REGULAR spenders ratio... covers ALOT more people
which if you put that ratio to the bitcoin mainnet tx count and do some maths of a months tx count.
means that in 36 years.. when technology naturally grows and nodes NATURALLY CAN COPE. and LN being just a side service. will all allow over 1billion users to happily hold bitcoin and spend regularly or irregularly without costing large fee's

now here is a little extra thing to think about.
bitcoin will not be a one world currency for 7-10billion people..
for many reasons.
imagine bitcoin only grabs 5% of the worlds population (relax, that is still making bitcoin one of the top 5 "nations" statistically)
you will see that bitcoin, in rational and natural growth, without having to push for large fee's, without having to force people to use LN. without having to halt bitcoin growth.. CAN COPE!!


Reason to bitcoin fail. Expensive blockchain. Users don't need to pay this. Already have another eco-friendly algorithm like DPOS.

  Develop Custom Decentralized Blockchain Applications in JavaScript with LISK!         
  Website | Blog | Reddit | Chat - Be part of the decentralized application movement!
  Lisk Delegate - Communitypool: 80% reward sharing delegate
Transparency Report
DoublerHunter
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 616

★YoBit.Net★ 350+ Coins Exchange & Dice


View Profile
February 24, 2017, 03:10:40 PM
 #26

I think we should just apply understanding to this king of scenario like the increasing fee on transactions because we all know that the bitcoin is in demand and the network can't sustain it so it needs a lot of miners and the miners also feels the difficult situation which is half block reward (Bitcoin Halving Effect) and the increased mining difficulty so they also needs to make profit and that is thru fees on transactions.

equator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868


Anonymous bitcoin mixer


View Profile
February 24, 2017, 03:51:35 PM
 #27

I think we should just apply understanding to this king of scenario like the increasing fee on transactions because we all know that the bitcoin is in demand and the network can't sustain it so it needs a lot of miners and the miners also feels the difficult situation which is half block reward (Bitcoin Halving Effect) and the increased mining difficulty so they also needs to make profit and that is thru fees on transactions.

So as per your quote then it will become on one stage that Bitcoin wont be worthy to use for transaction as the transaction fees will eat the bitcoins price. Then bitcoin will be expensive to use it due to high transaction fees.














 

 

█ 
█ 
█ 
█ 
█ 
█ 
█ 
█ 
█ 
█ 
█ 
BitBlender 

 













 















 












 
█ 
█ 
█ 
█ 
█ 
█ 
█ 
█ 
█ 
█ 
█ 
deisik
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386



View Profile
February 24, 2017, 04:15:00 PM
 #28

Transaction fees MUST replace the block subsidy to secure the network.

Competition for censorship-proof transactions on the most secure decentralized ledger in the world is a good thing.

Only spoiled brats who want to send pennies around the world, instantly, for free, are crying. They could care less about Bitcoin's unique use case which makes it truly valuable.

Yes, transaction fees must replace the block subsidy.  So under which scenario would more fees be generated?

    a) a full 1mb block with an average fee of .0015

    b) an almost full 2mb block with an average fee of .001

If you can fit more transactions into a block, the fee can be a bit lower and still generate more revenue for miners and have less congestion and waiting for the average user.  So let's get SegWit done and then when blocks start getting full again (and they will), let's have that moderate blocksize increase.  Running at 100% capacity only delivers a poor user experience.

This may not work out as you think

The weak point in your suggestion is that you implicitly assume that all blocks will be more or less filled. But right now the fill-up ratio is only about 85-90% on average. Yes, there are jams that happen now and then, though these are mostly thanks to spammy transactions. If the block size gets increased twice as much, the miners' profits obtained via transaction fees will most likely decline since there will be no more competition between senders for faster inclusion which leads to rising fees. So we shouldn't expect miners to accept SegWit or other measures to increase the block size any time soon

gentlemand
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1456


Hello You


View Profile
February 24, 2017, 04:42:53 PM
 #29

If the block size gets increased twice as much, the miners' profits obtained via transaction fees will most likely decline since there will be no more competition between senders for faster inclusion which leads to rising fees. So we shouldn't expect miners to accept SegWit or other measures to increase the block size any time soon

It's going to be really intriguing to see who blinks first. I'd guess that many of the current users are using it as a curio and luxury rather than having any pressing need. If the price keeps on rising then I suppose enough people will swallow it for now but I wouldn't underestimate the willingness of people to walk away.

Anyone using it for commerce from either direction must be not too far off shopping elsewhere, or they'll all go off chain such as the merchants now only accepting sales from Coinbase wallets.

Ayers
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1190


★Bitvest.io★ Play Plinko or Invest!


View Profile
February 24, 2017, 04:55:40 PM
 #30

i can't understand why miners are increasing the fee only because there are more transaction? isn't it done to prevent spam and only that? but where is the spam and how can they know which transaction is spammy and what not?, what would be the problem if the transaction was still at 20k satoshi?



.
.BITVEST DICE.
HAS BEEN RELEASED!


▄████████████████████▄
██████████████████████
██████████▀▀██████████
█████████░░░░█████████
██████████▄▄██████████
███████▀▀████▀▀███████
██████░░░░██░░░░██████
███████▄▄████▄▄███████
████▀▀████▀▀████▀▀████
███░░░░██░░░░██░░░░███
████▄▄████▄▄████▄▄████
██████████████████████

▀████████████████████▀
▄████████████████████▄
██████████████████████
█████▀▀█▀▀▀▀▀▀██▀▀████
█████░░░░░░░░░░░░░████
█████░░░░░░░░░░░░▄████
█████░░▄███▄░░░░██████
█████▄▄███▀░░░░▄██████
█████████░░░░░░███████
████████░░░░░░░███████
███████░░░░░░░░███████
███████▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄███████

██████████████████████
▀████████████████████▀
▄████████████████████▄
███████████████▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
███████████▀▀▄▄█░░░░░█
█████████▀░░█████░░░░█
███████▀░░░░░████▀░░░▀
██████░░░░░░░░▀▄▄█████
█████░▄░░░░░▄██████▀▀█
████░████▄░███████░░░░
███░█████░█████████░░█
███░░░▀█░██████████░░█
███░░░░░░████▀▀██▀░░░░
███░░░░░░███░░░░░░░░░░

██░▄▄▄▄░████▄▄██▄░░░░
████████████▀▀▀▀▀▀▀██
█████████████░█▀▀▀█░███
██████████▀▀░█▀░░░▀█░▀▀
███████▀░▄▄█░█░░░░░█░█▄
████▀░▄▄████░▀█░░░█▀░██
███░▄████▀▀░▄░▀█░█▀░▄░▀
█▀░███▀▀▀░░███░▀█▀░███░
▀░███▀░░░░░████▄░▄████░
░███▀░░░░░░░█████████░░
░███░░░░░░░░░███████░░░
███▀░██░░░░░░▀░▄▄▄░▀░░░
███░██████▄▄░▄█████▄░▄▄

██░████████░███████░█
▄████████████████████▄
████████▀▀░░░▀▀███████
███▀▀░░░░░▄▄▄░░░░▀▀▀██
██░▀▀▄▄░░░▀▀▀░░░▄▄▀▀██
██░▄▄░░▀▀▄▄░▄▄▀▀░░░░██
██░▀▀░░░░░░█░░░░░██░██
██░░░▄▄░░░░█░██░░░░░██
██░░░▀▀░░░░█░░░░░░░░██
██░░░░░▄▄░░█░░░░░██░██
██▄░░░░▀▀░░█░██░░░░░██
█████▄▄░░░░█░░░░▄▄████
█████████▄▄█▄▄████████

▀████████████████████▀




Rainbot
Daily Quests
Faucet
deisik
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386



View Profile
February 24, 2017, 05:08:18 PM
 #31

If the block size gets increased twice as much, the miners' profits obtained via transaction fees will most likely decline since there will be no more competition between senders for faster inclusion which leads to rising fees. So we shouldn't expect miners to accept SegWit or other measures to increase the block size any time soon

It's going to be really intriguing to see who blinks first. I'd guess that many of the current users are using it as a curio and luxury rather than having any pressing need. If the price keeps on rising then I suppose enough people will swallow it for now but I wouldn't underestimate the willingness of people to walk away.

Anyone using it for commerce from either direction must be not too far off shopping elsewhere, or they'll all go off chain such as the merchants now only accepting sales from Coinbase wallets

That's the point I'm continuously trying to make myself

We don't know how many transactions are made on a daily basis since only a certain part of them actually hits the blockchain. Using the same web wallet for instant transactions is an alternative to onchain transactions. In fact, I don't quite understand why major Bitcoin web wallets don't agree between themselves to process interwallet transactions directly bypassing the blockchain. As to me, that should be the right thing to do just like we can transfer funds between exchanges using the exchange codes. Miners are mostly rogue nowadays and not scalable overall. They got centralized beyond hope and should be disposed of

gentlemand
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1456


Hello You


View Profile
February 24, 2017, 05:18:49 PM
 #32

In fact, I don't quite understand why major Bitcoin web wallets don't agree between themselves to process interwallet transactions directly bypassing the blockchain. As to me, that should be the right thing to do just like we can transfer funds between exchanges using the exchange codes. Miners are mostly rogue nowadays and not scalable overall. They got centralized beyond hope and should be disposed of

That would be a quasi Paypal which I think is probably the direction it's going to go anyway. People will wake up one day and wonder what happened when their transaction is reversed and the underlying Bitcoin confiscated.

Yup. The mining situation is not fit for purpose IMO.


DooMAD
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1428



View Profile WWW
February 24, 2017, 06:05:32 PM
 #33

Transaction fees MUST replace the block subsidy to secure the network.

Competition for censorship-proof transactions on the most secure decentralized ledger in the world is a good thing.

Only spoiled brats who want to send pennies around the world, instantly, for free, are crying. They could care less about Bitcoin's unique use case which makes it truly valuable.

Yes, transaction fees must replace the block subsidy.  So under which scenario would more fees be generated?

    a) a full 1mb block with an average fee of .0015

    b) an almost full 2mb block with an average fee of .001

If you can fit more transactions into a block, the fee can be a bit lower and still generate more revenue for miners and have less congestion and waiting for the average user.  So let's get SegWit done and then when blocks start getting full again (and they will), let's have that moderate blocksize increase.  Running at 100% capacity only delivers a poor user experience.

This may not work out as you think

The weak point in your suggestion is that you implicitly assume that all blocks will be more or less filled. But right now the fill-up ratio is only about 85-90% on average. Yes, there are jams that happen now and then, though these are mostly thanks to spammy transactions. If the block size gets increased twice as much, the miners' profits obtained via transaction fees will most likely decline since there will be no more competition between senders for faster inclusion which leads to rising fees. So we shouldn't expect miners to accept SegWit or other measures to increase the block size any time soon

If we went with a flat, fixed increase, then sure, it's not ideal if there's no competition at all for space.  But I feel a flat cap would be a decidedly clumsy, unsophisticated approach and we can do better.  My preference would by a dynamic/adaptive algorithmic blocksize that would only be adjusted if blocks are predominantly filled within any given week or two:

The ideal solution is one that doesn't create a blocksize too large for full nodes to cope with, but at the same time, one that doesn't force a large number of people off chain.  Even doubling to 2MB in one go is quite high when you think about it, so we should aim to increase (or decrease) in smaller increments more often, if needed.  One possible route is to take the best elements of BIP100 and BIP106.  BIP100 only considers what benefits the miners and not the users.  BIP106 only considers what benefits the users and not the miners.  So neither is particularly balanced on its own.  

But I'm going to alter the code from my old quoted post to make the adjustments more conservative and also reduce the potential to game the system by factoring in the total fees generated in any given diff period, so if all the transactions are spam with low or zero fees, it would invalidate the chance of a blocksize adjustment.

Code:
Miners vote by encoding ‘BV’+BlockSizeRequestValue into coinbase scriptSig to:
    raise blocksize limit by 10%,
    lower blocksize limit by 10%,
    or remain at current blocksize limit.  

This, however, only carries weight if algorithmic conditions based on network traffic and generated fees are met:

If more than 50% of block's size, found in the first 2016 of the last difficulty period, is more than 90% MaxBlockSize
    AND (TotalTxFeeInLastDifficulty > TotalTxFeeInLastButOneDifficulty)
    Network votes for MaxBlockSize = MaxBlockSize +10%

Else if more than 90% of block's size, found in the first 2016 of the last difficulty period, is less than 50% MaxBlockSize
    Network votes for MaxBlockSize = MaxBlockSize -10%

Else
    Network votes for keeping the same MaxBlockSize
(credit to both Upal Chakraborty and Jeff Garzik for their original concepts, which this idea merges together and builds upon)

So in plain English, a small adjustment to the blocksize can occur each difficulty period, but only if:

  • There are sufficiently full blocks to justify an increase (or sufficiently empty to reduce it)
  • There are more fees generated in the last difficulty period than the previous one (blocksize can be reduced regardless of fees)
  • Miners agree to the change

No gigabyte blocks by midnight bloat and no sudden, sharp drop in fee pressure.  A gradual and sophisticated alleviation to the strain, not a rash and crude hack.

deisik
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386



View Profile
February 24, 2017, 06:23:17 PM
 #34

In fact, I don't quite understand why major Bitcoin web wallets don't agree between themselves to process interwallet transactions directly bypassing the blockchain. As to me, that should be the right thing to do just like we can transfer funds between exchanges using the exchange codes. Miners are mostly rogue nowadays and not scalable overall. They got centralized beyond hope and should be disposed of

That would be a quasi Paypal which I think is probably the direction it's going to go anyway. People will wake up one day and wonder what happened when their transaction is reversed and the underlying Bitcoin confiscated

You should keep in mind that it cuts both ways

What I mean to say is that right now we have exactly the opposite situation, i.e. scammers taking possession of legit users' coins with no way to charge back or make them pay for their fraudulent ways. Let's be honest, PayPal is far from perfect but it still provides some protection to legitimate users against scammers. The flip side of the coin is mostly due to administratively imposed government regulations. With Bitcoin, this obviously won't work, and the free market will be the ultimate judge since no one will be using a service which does something truly nasty

gentlemand
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1456


Hello You


View Profile
February 24, 2017, 06:28:54 PM
 #35

With Bitcoin, this obviously won't work, and the free market will be the ultimate judge since no one will be using a service which does something nasty

There only need to be enough happy customers to drown out the ones who are potentially needlessly raped. And no service wants to be nasty, when money's involved they're so twitchy to please The Man they'll go insanely overboard with a breath of provocation.

And this scenario already partially exists in the form of Coinbase and we can see every day that people are getting nuked by them, often with no explanation. With an accessible blockchain at least Coinbase is purely optional. It wouldn't be if this stuff carries on.

The effort to keep Bitcoin decentralised and censorless in its current form will drive the majority of users straight to massively centralised services.

BillyBobZorton
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1008


MatrixCoin - Creating Bright Future Together


View Profile
February 24, 2017, 06:32:43 PM
 #36

Transaction fees MUST replace the block subsidy to secure the network.

Competition for censorship-proof transactions on the most secure decentralized ledger in the world is a good thing.

Only spoiled brats who want to send pennies around the world, instantly, for free, are crying. They could care less about Bitcoin's unique use case which makes it truly valuable.

There are only 2 type of people that still haven't understood those facts:

1) Delusional idiots that still don't get the fact that bitcoin is secure is because of its conservative blocksize
2) Paid trolls to trash against blockstream

Bitcoin is not a socialist utopia. Storing transactions in a decentralized network is expensive. Pay the fee and shut the fuck.


██████████.......█████......
████████████.....███████.....
███....█████.....███████.....
███....█████.....███████.....
████....██████...█████████....
██████......██████████...█████████....
█████......██████......████....██...█████████....
█████......██████......████....███.███████████...
█████......██████......████....███.███████████...
███...................█████████████████.███████████...
███..███..█████.......██████████.████████████.█████████..
███..█████.......██████████.████████████.█████████..
█████.......██████████.████████████.█████████..
██████......███...███████████...██████████.
██████......███...███████████...██████████.
██████......███...███████████...██████████.
██████......██.....█████████.....██████████
██████████.....█████████.....██████████
██████████.....█████████.....██████████
   
██
█  ██  █
█  ██  █
█  ██  █
█  ██  █
█  ██  █
█  ██  █
█  ██  █

█  ██  █

█  ██  █

█  ██  █

█  ██  █

██
   
██
█  ██  █
█  ██  █
█  ██  █
█  ██  █
█  ██  █
█  ██  █
█  ██  █

█  ██  █

█  ██  █

█  ██  █

█  ██  █

██
   
➤  TWITTER
➤  FACEBOOK
➤  INSTAGRAM
deisik
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386



View Profile
February 24, 2017, 06:36:34 PM
 #37

With Bitcoin, this obviously won't work, and the free market will be the ultimate judge since no one will be using a service which does something nasty

There only need to be enough happy customers to drown out the ones who are potentially needlessly raped. And no service wants to be nasty, when money's involved they're so twitchy to please The Man they'll go insanely overboard with a breath of provocation.

And this scenario already exists in the form of Coinbase and we can see every day that people are getting nuked by them, often with no explanation. With an accessible blockchain at least Coinbase is purely optional. It wouldn't be if this stuff carries on

This is a meaningless argument

Note that I don't deny that some folks end up nuked by this web wallet. Just today I read about some guy who lost 16 bitcoins there (which were confiscated by Coinbase). What I say basically comes down to asserting that there should always be a reason behind locking someone's funds. I don't say that it is necessarily a legit one, but otherwise we have no other option left but to assume that Coinbase uses a random number generator which arbitrarily bans their clients and takes possession of their money

There are only 2 type of people that still haven't understood those facts:

1) Delusional idiots that still don't get the fact that bitcoin is secure is because of its conservative blocksize
2) Paid trolls to trash against blockstream

Bitcoin is not a socialist utopia. Storing transactions in a decentralized network is expensive. Pay the fee and shut the fuck.

The only one who is delusional here is you. Over 90% of all transactions are nowadays confirmed by a dozen (or even less) miners. Now tell us more about decentralization

Kprawn
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1302


JOLYY - The future of beauty!


View Profile
February 24, 2017, 07:11:51 PM
 #38

People looking for instant transaction confirmations and cheap transactions will move over to third party services like Xapo. You will still be using

Bitcoin, but not in the way that it was intended to be used. You will also strip all financial security and you will be more vulnerable to hacks. The

whole protocol was designed to allow for a competitive environment. { Compete for block rewards and fees and also to run your version of the

code you submitted. }

            ███           ▄▄▄████████▄▄▄           ███       ▀███          ▀██▄ ▄██▀          ███▀
            ███         ▄████▀▀    ▀▀████▄         ███         ███          ▀█████           ███
            ███       ▄███▀            ▀███▄       ███          ▀██▄         ▄███▄         ▄██▀
            ███      ███▀                ▀███      ███            ███       ███▀███       ███
            ███     ███▀                  ▀███     ███             ▀██▄   ▄██▀   ▀██▄   ▄██▀
            ███     ███                    ███     ███               ███▄██▀       ▀██▄██▀
            ███     ███                    ███     ███                ▀███▀         ▀███▀
            ███     ███                    ███     ███                 ███           ███
            ███     ███▄                  ▄███     ███                 ███           ███
            ███      ███▄                ▄███      ███                 ███           ███
           ███▀       ▀███▄            ▄███▀       ▀███                ███           ███
██▄▄▄  ▄▄▄███▀          ▀████▄▄    ▄▄████▀          ▀███▄▄▄  ▄▄▄██     ███           ███
▀▀████████▀▀              ▀▀▀████████▀▀▀              ▀▀████████▀▀     ███           ███
........T H E   F U T U R E.................
......................o f   B E A U T Y
........


 ▀█▄             ▄▄▄▄▄▄
   ▀█▄      ▄▄███▀▀▀▀
    ▄██     ▀▀▀     ▄▄▄▄
 ▄▄▄ ██         ▄     ▀▀██▄
▀█▀█▀█▀▄       █▄     ▄██▀
               ▀████████
               ▀ ▀ ▀ ▀ ▀


      ▄▄
     ▀█▀▀▀

    █▄
     ███████▀▀▀
    █▄
      ▀▀▀▀▀
hardtime
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 406


★Bitvest.io★ Play Plinko or Invest!


View Profile
February 24, 2017, 07:30:15 PM
 #39

I still remember the times when you could get a bitcoin transaction confirmed within the next block for 15 cents for the transaction fee and people were still complaining that it was too high. I guess you don't know how good we had it until we lost it and now have to pay $.50 cents for one block $.47 cents for one block. Pretty disgusting in my opinion to see such a high fee when not so long ago it was much cheaper.

People may go ahead and say "well the only people complain are the ones that send around small amount of money" that's a horrid attitude to have when it comes to all of this. If we want Bitcoin to go mainstream this can't occur because lets just say someone wants to buy something for $5.00 do you think they're going to spend 10 percent more to use bitcoin or they're just going to use their credit card or FIAT cash.



BITVEST DICE
HAS BEEN RELEASED!


▄████████████████████▄
██████████████████████
██████████▀▀██████████
█████████░░░░█████████
██████████▄▄██████████
███████▀▀████▀▀███████
██████░░░░██░░░░██████
███████▄▄████▄▄███████
████▀▀████▀▀████▀▀████
███░░░░██░░░░██░░░░███
████▄▄████▄▄████▄▄████
██████████████████████
▀████████████████████▀
▄████████████████████▄
██████████████████████
█████▀▀█▀▀▀▀▀▀██▀▀████
█████░░░░░░░░░░░░░▄███
█████░░░░░░░░░░░░▄████
█████░░▄███▄░░░░██████
█████▄▄███▀░░░░▄██████
█████████░░░░░░███████
████████░░░░░░░███████
███████░░░░░░░░███████
███████▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄███████
██████████████████████
▀████████████████████▀
▄████████████████████▄
███████████████▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
███████████▀▀▄▄█░░░░░█
█████████▀░░█████░░░░█
███████▀░░░░░████▀░░░▀
██████░░░░░░░░▀▄▄█████
█████░▄░░░░░▄██████▀▀█
████░████▄░███████░░░░
███░█████░█████████░░█
███░░░▀█░██████████░░█
███░░░░░░████▀▀██▀░░░░
███░░░░░░███░░░░░░░░░░
▀██░▄▄▄▄░████▄▄██▄░░░░
▄████████████▀▀▀▀▀▀▀██▄
█████████████░█▀▀▀█░███
██████████▀▀░█▀░░░▀█░▀▀
███████▀░▄▄█░█░░░░░█░█▄
████▀░▄▄████░▀█░░░█▀░██
███░▄████▀▀░▄░▀█░█▀░▄░▀
█▀░███▀▀▀░░███░▀█▀░███░
▀░███▀░░░░░████▄░▄████░
░███▀░░░░░░░█████████░░
░███░░░░░░░░░███████░░░
███▀░██░░░░░░▀░▄▄▄░▀░░░
███░██████▄▄░▄█████▄░▄▄
▀██░████████░███████░█▀
▄████████████████████▄
████████▀▀░░░▀▀███████
███▀▀░░░░░▄▄▄░░░░▀▀▀██
██░▀▀▄▄░░░▀▀▀░░░▄▄▀▀██
██░▄▄░░▀▀▄▄░▄▄▀▀░░░░██
██░▀▀░░░░░░█░░░░░██░██
██░░░▄▄░░░░█░██░░░░░██
██░░░▀▀░░░░█░░░░░░░░██
██░░░░░▄▄░░█░░░░░██░██
██▄░░░░▀▀░░█░██░░░░░██
█████▄▄░░░░█░░░░▄▄████
█████████▄▄█▄▄████████
▀████████████████████▀




Rainbot
Daily Quests
Faucet
gentlemand
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1456


Hello You


View Profile
February 24, 2017, 07:40:42 PM
 #40

Pretty disgusting in my opinion to see such a high fee when not so long ago it was much cheaper.

One tiny detail has slipped your mind. Bitcoin itself was much cheaper not so long ago. If we were still in the 2/300s the fee would be 10c or less. Miners are probably making broadly similar amounts of BTC per block in fees and they can't be expected to take fiat fluctuations into account.

Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!