Transaction Fees are SPIKING !

[MahaRamana]

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.
The result is spiking transaction fees that might seriously hurt the network and its growth in 2017 if there is nothing done very quickly.
If nothing is done and transaction costs keep spiking, a lot of activity will move to cheaper rising networks like DASH. I am not saying it is a bad thing but Bitcoin is NOT well positioned right now at the technical level to benefit from its rise in popularity.

[1715037266]

1715037266

[1715037266]

1715037266

[RawDog]

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.
The result is spiking transaction fees that might seriously hurt the network and its growth in 2017 if there is nothing done very quickly.
If nothing is done and transaction costs keep spiking, a lot of activity will move to cheaper rising networks like DASH. I am not saying it is a bad thing but Bitcoin is NOT well positioned right now at the technical level to benefit from its rise in popularity.

This is good for Blockstream.  Now more people will need lightning and will pay Adam Back to let them conduct their transactions on his side chain.  This higher the fee, the better it is for Adam to start collecting fees on his private platform.  Keep it up.  Way up.

[Holliday]

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.

[OROBTC]

...

It's chappin' my butt too.  I just paid $0.97 a little while ago, it confirmed right away (first block).  I sent one out yesterday with $0.90 or so, it took a couple of blocks even using ViaBTC's acceleration service (they only take 100 trx per hour though).

This is serious, as there are some wallet addresses that EXPIRE after a certain number of hours, if the trx does not go through, BTC could be lost forever...



EDIT: Interesting observation there, Holliday.

[franckuestein]

...


This is serious, as there are some wallet addresses that EXPIRE after a certain number of hours, if the trx does not go through, BTC could be lost forever...
...

BTC won't be lost forever.

Some third party services, merchants or even people like you and me using a wallet like Electrum can set an expiry date for a payment request. An example of a use case could be to prevent customers from submitting payments after the quoted price is no longer valid.

That's why your bitcoins won't be lost and wallet addresses don't expire. In case you send bitcoins to a third party service like kraken or you use a payment gateway like coinbase, you'll have to follow its rules and this is not bitcoin's 'fault'.

Coinbase example:

What happens if a payment is received after the window has expired?

If a customer pays a merchant after the 15 minute window has closed, a few things happen:
Coinbase forwards the funds to the merchant's wallet along with a note explaining that the payment was late.
Coinbase sends an email to the merchant to notify them about the incoming transaction.

source: https://support.coinbase.com/customer/portal/articles/1544747-what-happens-if-a-merchant-payment-window-expires-

another example w/ bitpay

other companies will ask you to send them a support ticket as they'll take care of it. But again, this is just their police to protect their customers from aggressive price fluctuations, not because addresses really expire. Their expiration date is just the duration they accept for a payment to be made. If you send bitcoins to an 'expired address', that address will contain the amount that you sent, bitcoins don't disappear from nowhere 

[btcdevil]

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.
The result is spiking transaction fees that might seriously hurt the network and its growth in 2017 if there is nothing done very quickly.
If nothing is done and transaction costs keep spiking, a lot of activity will move to cheaper rising networks like DASH. I am not saying it is a bad thing but Bitcoin is NOT well positioned right now at the technical level to benefit from its rise in popularity.

It is all natural that the price is also increasing so high due to that their are so many traders who are just waiting for this price increase and now they are transferring the bitcoins to the exchanges to sell it. Due to which their is so many transaction that it is creating late due to heavy transaction and their is high traffic so in this what happens that who ever pays the more high transaction fees their transaction is getting cleared soon. So it just like pay high and get VIP treatment of your transaction to get soon confirmation.

[OROBTC]

...

frankuestein just wrote:

"BTC won't be lost forever.

Some third party services, merchants or even people like you and me using a wallet like Electrum can set an expiry date for a payment request. An example of a use case could be to prevent customers from submitting payments after the quoted price is no longer valid.

That's why your bitcoins won't be lost and wallet addresses don't expire. In case you send bitcoins to a third party service like kraken or you use a payment gateway like coinbase, you'll have to follow its rules and this is not bitcoin's 'fault'."


Bitmixer.io for one has addresses that expire in 24 hours.  They then DELETE the address & account info.  As far as I know, that means any BTC arriving late is GONE.  And that would be terrible for the unwary who might lose a big chunk of money when the blockchain is stopped-up...

[DooMAD]

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.

Bitmixer.io for one has addresses that expire in 24 hours.  They then DELETE the address & account info.  As far as I know, that means any BTC arriving late is GONE.  And that would be terrible for the unwary who might lose a big chunk of money when the blockchain is stopped-up...

There are also potential issues with Lightning where a timelock could potentially expire, enabling coin theft by the counterparty if a transaction takes too long to confirm.  Whatever scaling solution we opt for, it needs to maintain an equilibrium between the ability for those who want to being able to run a full node without incurring significant cost and the ability for users to transact without the possibility of losing equally significant sums due to delays caused by traffic.

[Senor.Bla]

...

frankuestein just wrote:

"BTC won't be lost forever.

Some third party services, merchants or even people like you and me using a wallet like Electrum can set an expiry date for a payment request. An example of a use case could be to prevent customers from submitting payments after the quoted price is no longer valid.

That's why your bitcoins won't be lost and wallet addresses don't expire. In case you send bitcoins to a third party service like kraken or you use a payment gateway like coinbase, you'll have to follow its rules and this is not bitcoin's 'fault'."


Bitmixer.io for one has addresses that expire in 24 hours.  They then DELETE the address & account info.  As far as I know, that means any BTC arriving late is GONE.  And that would be terrible for the unwary who might lose a big chunk of money when the blockchain is stopped-up...

I do think the high fees are a problem and unnecessary. Nobody wants their Bitcoins to be lost. It is not cool, when you can not be certain to get confirmed within 24 hours, but this is not alone Bitcoins fault. Mixing services should be aware and response to this. Just blaming Bitcoin is not a good course of action.

[unamis76]

...

frankuestein just wrote:

"BTC won't be lost forever.

Some third party services, merchants or even people like you and me using a wallet like Electrum can set an expiry date for a payment request. An example of a use case could be to prevent customers from submitting payments after the quoted price is no longer valid.

That's why your bitcoins won't be lost and wallet addresses don't expire. In case you send bitcoins to a third party service like kraken or you use a payment gateway like coinbase, you'll have to follow its rules and this is not bitcoin's 'fault'."


Bitmixer.io for one has addresses that expire in 24 hours.  They then DELETE the address & account info.  As far as I know, that means any BTC arriving late is GONE.  And that would be terrible for the unwary who might lose a big chunk of money when the blockchain is stopped-up...

I think that the point franckuestein wanted to make is that the Bitcoins are still there, at the address they were sent to. If that service deletes the private keys, well... Taking franckuestein words, "you'll have to follow their rules"

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

Yes, at least partially, in some point in the distant future. Here's to hoping there are enough low fee transactions in the network to support pools and/or the stake big players and miners have in Bitcoin is enough to justify hashing regardless of people paying big or small fees

[franckuestein]

...

Bitmixer.io for one has addresses that expire in 24 hours.  They then DELETE the address & account info.  As far as I know, that means any BTC arriving late is GONE.  And that would be terrible for the unwary who might lose a big chunk of money when the blockchain is stopped-up...

With my original message I just wanted to clarify that bitcoin addresses don't expire the way you think. Services set their own time limit for payment requests but addresses don't expire.

Please ALWAYS save (and verify) Letter of Guarantee before send us coins! If something goes wrong, we can't help you without a Letter of Guarantee. The support team doesn't have access to mixing transactions, the database is encrypted, moreover we delete all order's info after 24 hours. We keep the private key of the generated address for several days, so if you sent coins after 24 hour we still can process your order ONLY if you have the Letter of Guarantee.

As you can see in this message quoted from official BITMIXER account, they keep private keys for some days after that 24h deadline. Maybe they wait for 7 days, 14 days, 1 month or whatever... we don't know
In conclusion, the unique expiration that exists here is the time they decide they'll offer a service for you. Anyway, I think that this is completely third-party service offtopic and my intention was just to clarify the expiration concept.

[OROBTC]

...

frankuestein, unamis76, Holliday

Thank you all for your insights into the way that BTC works in these circumstances.  We are now entering into terra icognita for me, beyond my limits to intelligently (?) comment.

Higher fees are not the whole solution (though perhaps an important part.)  The system itself must get more robust.

Many of us have been complaining (when the system is under stress) for at least as long as I have been here at bitcointalk.  I am perplexed and dismayed that the developers and miners cannot or will not FIX this.

[Meuh6879]

The system itself must get more robust.

Your bank work 24h/24 and 7 days since 8 years ?
no.

Bitcoin ?
yes.

[cjmoles]

Maybe you guys who know what your talking about can help this guy: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1800782.msg17942850#msg17942850

[lister storm]

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.
The result is spiking transaction fees that might seriously hurt the network and its growth in 2017 if there is nothing done very quickly.
If nothing is done and transaction costs keep spiking, a lot of activity will move to cheaper rising networks like DASH. I am not saying it is a bad thing but Bitcoin is NOT well positioned right now at the technical level to benefit from its rise in popularity.

that is just ridiculous, we need to do something about it, it is going to be soon cheaper to move money via the western union than bitcoins, what is really sad

[franky1]

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

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

in a couple decades!! not any time soon

stop faking the need for high fee's as if your trying to hug up to pools. they dont care about the fee's, they see it as a bonus not needed income
stop trying to be subtle about promoting commercial services like LN.

you will end up being the sore loser later when you think you can make income being a LN hopper, but no users will use LN hops due to the fee's per hop.

the scripts are becoming too obvious. the bait and switch doom and utopia stories are too obvious.

higher fee's hurt users.
higher fee's hurt the unbanked adoption
higher fee's are just a bad and rotten way to convert people to think commercial services as the future.

i feel sorry for how badly you have sold your soul to centralist corporations.

[MahaRamana]

...

frankuestein, unamis76, Holliday

We are now entering into terra icognita for me, beyond my limits to intelligently (?) comment.

Thank you for this display of humility. I must say I am in the same situation. This is why I bring this up.

However I would like to understand more the network to evaluate the risks of the situation and the risks related to Bitcoin's current governance.

Maybe increase of tx fees will be good for what bitcoin has to become, for exemple the most secure and robust digital store of value on the planet, which it arguably already is.
But nevertheless I am concerned with the unacceptable censorship that has been going on in reddit /Bitcoin, the opaque role and interests of Blockstream, the divide between SegWit and Unlimited, and more generally the lack of a properly incentivised consensus building mechanism for the governance of Bitcoin.

This article talks about why increase tx fees might be good : https://medium.com/@bergealex4/bitcoin-is-unstable-without-the-block-size-size-limit-70db07070a54#.9hpssyuv0

Still I am not convinced and I am getting some uneasy feeling about this sharp increase in tx fees and network slow down.

[Winner]

I am not sure why there is post after post of usually the same people posting within a thread and complaining about Bitcoin transaction fee's. You guys realize that you don't have to pay a high fee for Bitcoin right? If you really wanted to spend Bitcoin faster then you should've just transferred the coins and withdrew it from another payment processor and paid with that.

Bitcoin shouldn't be an object that can get spent, you guys are really missing the purpose. Sure, spending money is fine but when you look at the references within Satoshi's White Paper you would see why he referenced those links.
Bitcoin transactions aren't fast at the moment, you should already know that and have gotten over that fact.

[Holliday]

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

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

in a couple decades!! not any time soon

We are already experiencing resistance to tiny fees due to eight years of block subsidies providing the network's security. If we kick that can further down the road, there will be even more resistance. I see nothing wrong with some healthy competition to get fast confirmations. The sooner this transition from block subsidies to transaction fees begins, the smoother it will play out over time.

Some spoiled brats are going to cry because buying a coffee with the most secure decentralized ledger on the planet is unreasonable.

Expecting censorship-proof transactions for daily, mundane purchases is a waste of resources, and unreasonable.

Increasing the burden of every full node operator, who must keep a complete list of every transaction in the history of Bitcoin, so someone can buy a coffee... is unreasonable.

Finally, calling everyone who disagrees with you a "corporate shill" is not an argument. It's as bad as assuming everyone who wants bigger blocks ultimately wants to increase the 21 million coin limit because inflation will be the only way forward to pay for network security when there is no longer any reason to keep the block size small since only a handful of corporate operated full nodes will exist due to the amount of resources required for massive block chain upkeep when every transaction under the sun is written directly into the fucking permanent ledger!

[franky1]

Increasing the burden of every full node operator, who must keep a complete list of every transaction in the history of Bitcoin, so someone can buy a coffee... is unreasonable.

lol increasing the burden?
8 years of tx data can fit on a memory store the size of a fingernail
the validation of transactions and blocks can be done on a $50 device

yep we are not in 2009 no more.
we have larger capacity microsd card..
raspberry Pi is now raspberry pi 3.

Finally, calling everyone who disagrees with you a "corporate shill" is not an argument. It's as bad as assuming everyone who wants bigger blocks ultimately wants to increase the 21 million coin limit because inflation will be the only way forward to pay for network security when there is no longer any reason to keep the block size small since only a handful of corporate operated full nodes will exist due to the amount of resources required for massive block chain upkeep when every transaction under the sun is written directly into the fucking permanent ledger!

technology has move way way beyond what was available 8 years ago but you advocate holding blocksizes back because........
oh the fake doomsday of gigabytes by midnight.
wake up to reality. it will be gigabytes in 50 years, not 5 minutes

nodes using consensus will naturally scale a dynamic block based on what NODES CAN HANDLE. so it grows naturally over time.. not leading to centralisation!. not leading to gigabytes by midnight. learn consensus

at which time a gigabyte block will have the same 'feel' as 1mb today. people will have petabyte data storage. and be laughing that 50year prior(now) people thought 100gb was HUGE.
much like right now we look back 20 years and laugh when people thought 3gb hard drives were huge

Holliday
your mindset is like you want to go back to 1996 and tell activision to never invent Call of Duty, because it requires 50gb storage on average per year(updates, patches, new releases) and the online mode needs atleast 20x dialup speed.

your mindset is like you want to go back to 1996 to tell apple to not invent facetime in the future for the reasons of doomsdays of bandwidth needed
your mindset is like you want to go back to 1996 to tell microsoft to not buy skype in the future for the reasons of doomsdays of bandwidth needed