Transaction Fees and Transaction Performance

[RollerCoasterCrypto]

How related are transaction fees and transaction / network performance?

Fees have become insane since I started with BTC in 2013. Micro-transactions no longer make sense. I am a miner(pool), and have mined since 2013. What is driving these transaction fees so high? Is it performance/efficiency issues?

If so, are there more transactions than the network can handle? What if we actually helped people run full nodes, would that help? Where is there hope for this situation?

[1715261252]

1715261252

[1715261252]

1715261252

[1715261252]

1715261252

[1715261252]

1715261252

[Kakmakr]

The answer is simple :

~ Bitcoin Core developers introduced SegWit as a temporary scaling solution and the services and the exchanges are just ignoring it. <I call it a boycot>

~ BCash was introduced and now miners can choose to mine the most profitable coin. They leave  Bitcoin <BTC> and start to mine BCash or something else and wait for the Mempool to become congested and the miners fees to increase and then they jump back to BTC to feed on the higher fees. <exploiting the users>

~ Someone wants Bitcoin to look bad, so they spam the network to make it worst. This cause further congestion and higher miners fees.

These greedy MOFOs are sabotaging the Bitcoin network and they are getting away with it. ^grrrr^

[squatter]

~ Bitcoin Core developers introduced SegWit as a temporary scaling solution and the services and the exchanges are just ignoring it. <I call it a boycot>

It's actually the first step towards a permanent scaling solution (Lightning). My understanding is that all Lightning code was written with Segwit's malleability fix in mind. It should be noted that Segwit is just a small linear capacity bump.

I'm seeing a lot of people make a big deal about exchanges not adding Segwit, but the difference would be marginal. Last month, you could pay 5 satoshis per byte to push a transaction, and fairly quickly. Today, some people are paying 600 satoshis per byte. That has nothing to do with Segwit adoption.

~ BCash was introduced and now miners can choose to mine the most profitable coin. They leave  Bitcoin <BTC> and start to mine BCash or something else and wait for the Mempool to become congested and the miners fees to increase and then they jump back to BTC to feed on the higher fees. <exploiting the users>

~ Someone wants Bitcoin to look bad, so they spam the network to make it worst. This cause further congestion and higher miners fees.

It's pretty obvious by now what's going on. Someone waited until just after the last difficulty adjustment to drop 4-6 exahashes of mining power from the network. This coincides with a spam attack. What else does it coincide with? A BCH pump, of course! They're even promoting it on CNBC now. This has Jihan Wu and Roger Ver's name all over it.

[Maveth13]

The answer is simple :

~ Bitcoin Core developers introduced SegWit as a temporary scaling solution and the services and the exchanges are just ignoring it. <I call it a boycot>

~ BCash was introduced and now miners can choose to mine the most profitable coin. They leave  Bitcoin <BTC> and start to mine BCash or something else and wait for the Mempool to become congested and the miners fees to increase and then they jump back to BTC to feed on the higher fees. <exploiting the users>

~ Someone wants Bitcoin to look bad, so they spam the network to make it worst. This cause further congestion and higher miners fees.

These greedy MOFOs are sabotaging the Bitcoin network and they are getting away with it. ^grrrr^

-Software development takes a lot of time to implement, especially when there are a lot of backlogs customers are asking for. Well at least there's bitstamp that implements segwit.

-You can't blame miners if they want to mine a more profitable coin, it's called an opportunity.

[NJB18]

The answer is simple :

~ Bitcoin Core developers introduced SegWit as a temporary scaling solution and the services and the exchanges are just ignoring it. <I call it a boycot>

~ BCash was introduced and now miners can choose to mine the most profitable coin. They leave  Bitcoin <BTC> and start to mine BCash or something else and wait for the Mempool to become congested and the miners fees to increase and then they jump back to BTC to feed on the higher fees. <exploiting the users>

~ Someone wants Bitcoin to look bad, so they spam the network to make it worst. This cause further congestion and higher miners fees.

These greedy MOFOs are sabotaging the Bitcoin network and they are getting away with it. ^grrrr^

-Software development takes a lot of time to implement, especially when there are a lot of backlogs customers are asking for. Well at least there's bitstamp that implements segwit.

-You can't blame miners if they want to mine a more profitable coin, it's called an opportunity.

In my opinion, there won't be a mainstream coin where miners can become too influential. Will this means that premined coins are better when it comes to decentralization? If banks are influencing the current monetary system then miners should not have that kind of power in crypto?

[Rahar02]

How related are transaction fees and transaction / network performance?

Network performance? Whenever mempool get flooded by hundreds of thousands unconfirmed transactions, the fees increases, due to blockchain can't afford too many transactions/sec. Maybe bitcoin really need bigger block size, or lightning network can be solved this problem.

Fees have become insane since I started with BTC in 2013. Micro-transactions no longer make sense. I am a miner(pool), and have mined since 2013. What is driving these transaction fees so high? Is it performance/efficiency issues?

If you have been in crypto-world since 2013 especially for a miner (pool), you should get used to it because it's a repeated cycle.

If so, are there more transactions than the network can handle? What if we actually helped people run full nodes, would that help? Where is there hope for this situation?

No hope for this situation, just waiting for another scale solution to be implemented.

[jnano]

Are there any stats on the distribution of software/web clients normal users use?
I do wonder if SegWit would start happening once Bitcoin Core exposes it in the GUI, presumably in v0.16.

But if the immediate result of SegWit is just an average doubling of capacity, then maybe even that is not enough for the current network congestion.

[@prashant]

Not a new thing in crypto ,but new fork made a joke out of btc.evey year there are multiple fork for greed.there is segwit2x announced  in dec 28.btc has become old technology now ,need waves like blockchain to implement in upcoming technology.fees less and transaction lighting fast.

[Ned Kelly]

Are there any stats on the distribution of software/web clients normal users use?
I do wonder if SegWit would start happening once Bitcoin Core exposes it in the GUI, presumably in v0.16.

But if the immediate result of SegWit is just an average doubling of capacity, then maybe even that is not enough for the current network congestion.

I think mass adoption of SegWit will bring the fees to sub 100 sat/byte level. However, if network will grow and LN is not ready by this time, then it can be a problem.

And we need some consensus by this time. Something like: If X% (Let's say 80%) txs in last re-target period is segwit txs and median txs fee is higher than Y then we do Z.

[jnano]

I think mass adoption of SegWit will bring the fees to sub 100 sat/byte level.

That's far from great in my eyes. Sub 10 s/b would be more useful, and that's assuming current BTC values.

then we do Z.

Z being what? Fees are driven by market demand combined with network capacity. If you fix neither, what else?

[Ned Kelly]

I think mass adoption of SegWit will bring the fees to sub 100 sat/byte level.

That's far from great in my eyes. Sub 10 s/b would be more useful, and that's assuming current BTC values.

then we do Z.

Z being what? Fees are driven by market demand combined with network capacity. If you fix neither, what else?

Sub 10 s/b would be great. However, sub 100 sat/byte seems more realistic at the moment.

We have network capacity, but it's not used. We need well defined plan after we reach this capacity (80% Segwit adoption).
Z is some action which increase network capacity as you pointed out.
Schnorr Signatures as an example. Or even a block increase size after it.

[klimt1977]

Hello To everyone, I'm new on this forum :-)

I did a transaction on december 19;
487 bytes and a total fee of 0.00123986 BTC (about 254 Satoshi per byte)
and now (after 37 Hours) is still Unconfirmed...   
What can I do? 

many thanks!

Klimt!

[klimt1977]

Hello To everyone, I'm new on this forum :-)

I did a transaction on december 19;
487 bytes and a total fee of 0.00123986 BTC (about 254 Satoshi per byte)
and now (after 37 Hours) is still Unconfirmed...   
What can I do? 

many thanks!

Klimt!

you can use accelerators to get your transaction confirmed sooner.
some are free, and some are paid, paid ones usually works fast.

here is list of all accelerators :
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2624419.0

Many Thanks sbtcwallet.

But I already paid 0.00123986 BTC, is it normal I've to wait so many time?
Do you really think that these accellerator will help ?

Klimt

[onrise]

Hello To everyone, I'm new on this forum :-)

I did a transaction on december 19;
487 bytes and a total fee of 0.00123986 BTC (about 254 Satoshi per byte)
and now (after 37 Hours) is still Unconfirmed...   
What can I do? 

many thanks!

Klimt!

you can use accelerators to get your transaction confirmed sooner.
some are free, and some are paid, paid ones usually works fast.

here is list of all accelerators :
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2624419.0

Many Thanks sbtcwallet.

But I already paid 0.00123986 BTC, is it normal I've to wait so many time?
Do you really think that these accellerator will help ?

Klimt

I had transferred more than 48 hours back and still the transaction is not yet confirmed inspite of using the free accelerators. As the price rose the network fees are now a big pain. Smaller transaction is now impossible to done because fees might kill you. So if somebody has to wait for this long after paying fees as well than better to switch to ETH or some other coin and do the transfers now.

[revepatro]

fees are especially rocketting these last few days, I take a look every morning at https://bitcoinfees.earn.com/ for what it's worth (and it's probably way below accurate in terms of estimated blocks before confirmation), it pretty much increases by +100 sat./b every day for the most common fees used in the past 24h and now the main entry ticket to get confirmed in a few blocks as good old times is 820-830 sat/b, meaning about 30$ @ current BTC rate. and it's STILL growing. Just totally insane (& close to unusable for simple mortals...)

[dunfida]

Hello To everyone, I'm new on this forum :-)

I did a transaction on december 19;
487 bytes and a total fee of 0.00123986 BTC (about 254 Satoshi per byte)
and now (after 37 Hours) is still Unconfirmed...   
What can I do? 

many thanks!

Klimt!

you can use accelerators to get your transaction confirmed sooner.
some are free, and some are paid, paid ones usually works fast.

here is list of all accelerators :
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2624419.0

Many Thanks sbtcwallet.

But I already paid 0.00123986 BTC, is it normal I've to wait so many time?
Do you really think that these accellerator will help ?

Klimt

I had transferred more than 48 hours back and still the transaction is not yet confirmed inspite of using the free accelerators. As the price rose the network fees are now a big pain. Smaller transaction is now impossible to done because fees might kill you. So if somebody has to wait for this long after paying fees as well than better to switch to ETH or some other coin and do the transfers now.

This thing do already happen back on previous year as far as I remember which theres a congestion into the network because miners decide to jump into to other coin to mine and left bitcoin transactions to be dumped and when accumulated enough then that's the time they would come back same as being said above that they are somehow sabotaging bitcoin on purpose. Microtransactions wont really be pushed no matter on how many times you do use on those accelerators specially if you did put small amounts of fees then those txaccelerators wont really consider that one which means you would really be destined to wait.

[bambazamba]

How related are transaction fees and transaction / network performance?

Fees have become insane since I started with BTC in 2013. Micro-transactions no longer make sense. I am a miner(pool), and have mined since 2013. What is driving these transaction fees so high? Is it performance/efficiency issues?

If so, are there more transactions than the network can handle? What if we actually helped people run full nodes, would that help? Where is there hope for this situation?

The conjusted blockchain has lead to this atmosphere . There is so much delay in the transaction even though we are paying good bucks for that . That is so unfair . The lightning network have to come into practice as soon as possible . They are talking about segwit since last summer and it has seen such a delay in its actual implementation on all the wallets  .
The miners are really getting the big profit in this case because they can go for whatever they want to either Bitcoin or Bitcoin cash .

[Samarkand]

... They are talking about segwit since last summer and it has seen such a delay in its actual implementation on all the wallets  .
...

Coinbase and Bitpay have exacerbated this development by their refusal to implement
Segwit. If they would have adopted Segwit like Bitstamp or Bitwala did weeks ago, we wouldn´t nearly have
as much congestion of the network as we have now.

These businesses are a cancer on the Bitcoin ecosystem. Especially Bitpay follows a nefarious
agenda, because their business model doesn´t really work when Bitcoin becomes a store of value
and a settlement layer. They need fast confirmations and affordable fees and therefore are pushing Bitcoin Cash
and delaying Segwit integration.

[muhammedb]

The high rate of transactions fee is becoming too explosive and because of this more people are now afraid to running transaction when they need it.

[hatshepsut93]

... They are talking about segwit since last summer and it has seen such a delay in its actual implementation on all the wallets  .
...

Coinbase and Bitpay have exacerbated this development by their refusal to implement
Segwit. If they would have adopted Segwit like Bitstamp or Bitwala did weeks ago, we wouldn´t nearly have
as much congestion of the network as we have now.

These businesses are a cancer on the Bitcoin ecosystem. Especially Bitpay follows a nefarious
agenda, because their business model doesn´t really work when Bitcoin becomes a store of value
and a settlement layer. They need fast confirmations and affordable fees and therefore are pushing Bitcoin Cash
and delaying Segwit integration.

Not only SegWit, but also batched withdrawals, which could have lowered withdrawal fees for their customers by 80-90%. I'm pretty sure that they are just colluding with miners, and governments to centralize Bitcoin - they reject all the efficient and ellegant solutions and instead try to force big block crap like Bcash and B2X to kill the nodes by bloating blockchain and installing control over the network with their own datacenter-like nodes. Mining is already centralized AF, so full nodes is the only thing that keeps Bitcoin from turning into PayPal.