[2017-06-09] Bitcoin Hype Watch: Does Blockstream CEO Adam Back Want $100 Fees?

[moriskarlov]

The Bitcoin blocksize debacle, a leading contributor to the bubble building in the alternative cryptocurrency market, continues full speed ahead, gunning toward August, when a showdown is scheduled to occur regarding the User-Activated Soft Fork, BIP 148, which will invalidate blocks mined by non-segregated-witness and ultimately cause a mighty chain split and a period of confusion. The belief is that in the end, through these efforts, congestion will be reduced in the network and price will continue on its merry way to infinity.

Adam Back is a computer scientist. It’s typically incorrect to accuse him of basing statements on emotion or personal belief, and given that his own invention, Hashcash, was a necessary precursor to Bitcoin, it’s wrong to ham-fistedly take his words out of context the way some outlets have since Back yesterday tweeted the following:

i bet they'd pay $100/tx for digital gold, and mid-sized international remittance, I would. still be really good if fees were much lower.

People took this out of context. Someone on Reddit made a dramatic post, “Is this a joke?”

Of course, it’s not a joke. In international, high-value remittances, high-fees are perfectly acceptable. There are so many reasons for this it doesn’t bear much explaining. It still raises the question of why the cryptocurrency with the most user adoption and biggest network should be dedicated to one of the smaller use cases, in terms of traffic. If this were all Bitcoin were used for, would there even be significant block congestion?

Link to full article: https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/bitcoin-hype-watch-blockstream-ceo-adam-back-want-100-fees/

[Qartada]

It is unusual that he felt the need to bring that up because it feels like it's about how much Bitcoin could "get away with", so to speak.

The amount that people will pay for mid-sized international remittances is exactly the amount that they need to pay.  If some alt with a similar level of volatility to Bitcoin has fees of 500 times less, the same limited supply and similar security (Litecoin for example, which has been way more stable than Bitcoin over the last few weeks), why would people pay the transaction fee of $100 for Bitcoin?  The answer is that they wouldn't.  So his point makes no sense.

Still, it was blown way out of proportion, and he wasn't saying that people should pay that amount.

[cr1776]

i bet they'd pay $100/tx for digital gold, and mid-sized international remittance, I would. still be really good if fees were much lower.

It is a statement of what his opinion is about what "digital gold" would be worth and factually what he would pay to use it in the first half and what his wishes were in the second half. 

People do discuss things when there is a discussion going on.  Talk about someone trying to twist a tweet into something it wasn't.

[VadikZimnyayaRezina]

It is unusual that he felt the need to bring that up because it feels like it's about how much Bitcoin could "get away with", so to speak.

The amount that people will pay for mid-sized international remittances is exactly the amount that they need to pay.  If some alt with a similar level of volatility to Bitcoin has fees of 500 times less, the same limited supply and similar security (Litecoin for example, which has been way more stable than Bitcoin over the last few weeks), why would people pay the transaction fee of $100 for Bitcoin?  The answer is that they wouldn't.  So his point makes no sense.

Still, it was blown way out of proportion, and he wasn't saying that people should pay that amount.

Many people will refuse to use bitcoin if the commission is high. Already there are many dissatisfied people who switch to altcoins. This is a very serious threat to bitcoin.