[1050 TH] BitMinter.com [1% PPLNS,Pays TxFees +MergedMining,Stratum,GBT,vardiff]

[matt4054]

Being new I assumed it was safer to take coins at 0.001 to my wallet, to protect against the pool being hacked or going away ...
Why does it matter what my wallet was built with?
If the wallet now holds BTC50 and I pay out BTC10 surely it matters not that the BTC50 was saved up pennies ?

I will try a simple analogy:
If you have 500 coins worth $0.10 in your wallet, you have $50.
If you have one $50 note in your wallet, you have $50 as well.

Now if you go to a shop, and try to pay a $50 item with 500 $0.10 coins, the cashier may look at you in a weird way and you will get many haters if there is a queue behind you. That does not happen with the $50 note.

This is because altough theoretically with the same value, in practice, dealing with 500 small coins for a $50 payment bears a much higher side-cost (read money handling) than a $50 note. The same applies to Bitcoins, and it translates as much higher transaction fees.

[1614664272]

1614664272

[1614664272]

1614664272

[1614664272]

1614664272

[1614664272]

1614664272

[1614664272]

1614664272

[1614664272]

1614664272

[GuiltySpark343]

Why does it matter what my wallet was built with?
If the wallet now holds BTC50 and I pay out BTC10 surely it matters not that the BTC50 was saved up pennies ?

Think about it this way. If you're paying for a new cellphone that costs $200, it's way easier to count two $100 bills, than it is for the cashier to count 20,000 pennies. That would take the cashier a long time, causing long lines and people behind you getting angry for waiting.

In the BTC world, if you were paying 2 BTC with a wallet that accumulated 20 x 0.1 BTC, it's a smaller byte size transaction. Now if you were paying that 2 BTC with 2000 x 0.001 BTC, the byte size of that transaction goes up a lot, and it would have to be transmitted across the BTC network consuming bandwidth. I believe the reference Bitcoin-QT wallet (and Multibit) would enforce a transaction fee for doing that if you were ever to send a payment somewhere.

EDIT: Lol matt4054 had same analogy I did

[dodegkr]

that would mean btc is following fiat style methods, thats disappointing but i follow.
thanks

[sturle]

If the wallet now holds BTC50 and I pay out BTC10 surely it matters not that the BTC50 was saved up pennies ?

Yes, the fee is calculated from the size of the transaction in KB.  If you send 1 BTC consisting of 1000 0.001 coins..  Hmm, no.  That would be impossible, I think, because the transaction will have too many inputs to be valid.  If you send 0.1 BTC consisting of 100 0.001 sized inputs, the transaction will be approximately 18 KB large.  That means at least 0.009 BTC in fees, given a base fee of 0.0005 BTC per KB.  Which means 9 more 0.001 sized inputs have to be added just to pay the fee, which increases the fee to 0.01 BTC, and another 0.001 sized input has to be added to cover that as well.  If the input coins are young (recently received), it will cost even more.  You end up paying 10% of the transaction value in fees.
 
A transaction of 0.1 BTC from one 0.1 BTC input received a long time ago (more bitcoin-days destroyed), is only 180 bytes of inputs and will normally be free if the input is old enough.

[matt4054]

that would mean btc is following fiat style methods, thats disappointing but i follow.
thanks

The "coin" in "Bitcoin" comes with a reason indeed. This is necessary to keep the system distributed and not centralized in any way. To continue with my analogy, there are ways to convert 500 small coins into 1 big coin, but you will have to bear the price of this operation. And in the future, there are many payment systems that can develop over the Bitcoin "layer" to remove the burden of actually moving money, at the cost of centralization and "money as debt". I could write 1000 more lines on the subject but it would go off-topic, this forum is full of other topics for that.

[kano]

Yes, although bitcoin prides itself on being able to divide the coins and make micro payments, the developers don't really care about that and like to set the fees quite high by default.

You can already make transactions (without too much effort) quite a bit more expensive than using a bank or a credit card
They seem to think that anyone using these advertised advantages is spamming the blockchain.
Odd.
It would seem either that none of them have any finance background or they do and are trying to get transaction payments to be as high as the fiat systems we all hate.

Pool mining means that indeed you are using a pool as a bank unless you payout yourself with transactions that the bitcoin devs consider too small to use ...
p2pool, on the other hand, by default makes micro payments and thus you are guaranteed to fall into the transaction fee trap.

[gyverlb]

Yes, although bitcoin prides itself on being able to divide the coins and make micro payments, the developers don't really care about that and like to set the fees quite high by default.

You can already make transactions (without too much effort) quite a bit more expensive than using a bank or a credit card
They seem to think that anyone using these advertised advantages is spamming the blockchain.
Odd.
It would seem either that none of them have any finance background or they do and are trying to get transaction payments to be as high as the fiat systems we all hate.

Pool mining means that indeed you are using a pool as a bank unless you payout yourself with transactions that the bitcoin devs consider too small to use ...
p2pool, on the other hand, by default makes micro payments and thus you are guaranteed to fall into the transaction fee trap.

Nonsense. Confirming transactions has an operational cost: not even considering mining itself, storage across all the Bitcoin nodes isn't free. What's still missing and is on the road-map (look at the latest announcement for 0.8.2) is the creation of a market where miners and users will be able to find the right price for a transaction. Devs don't ignore the problem, they are designing a solution right now instead of whining about it.

Nearly all of my BTC is p2pool income and I don't have any problem with transaction fees (there are almost always <0.1% of my transactions which is far below the fees I know of). Miners with less hashrate could have problems but there too the p2pool devs are designing a solution instead of whining...

In case people didn't notice, Bitcoin is still in development (notice the major version number? 0?) arguing about deficiencies in an unfinished product nobody forces you to use is just trolling. kano, last time I checked you can code, why don't you go help with the solution instead of wasting your time spreading FUD?

[matt4054]

Dear Hero Members,

You all know how political both issues are, about tx fees and the max block size in the blockchain. There are already (too) many topics discussing the issue, and everyone seems to know better than the other one, because it's highly politicial and depends on your own vision for Bitcoin as a payment system.

Nothing wrong in discussing it (politely and w/o ad hominem), but please do not hijack DrHaribo's BitMinter topic to discuss it. Thank you.

[gyverlb]

You all know how political both issues are, about tx fees and the max block size in the blockchain.

I believe you are mistaken: they aren't political at all.
They are technical problems to solve: that's the beauty of the Bitcoin system.
People whining about "political" problems just don't matter, people coding solutions do.

But you are right, that's not the place to discuss it, I'll ignore other posts on the subject here.

[matt4054]

This is costing bit minter?  This is costing myself?

It is costing to BitMinter, because they have to pay the tx fee. They can mitigate the fee by using transactions with many outputs, but the message size (that determines the fee) will increase anyway, so yes it is a cost for BitMinter.

But it is also costing you, because whenever you want to spend these small coins, you will have to pay a (sometimes much) higher transaction fee than if you were paying with bigger (like 0.5 BTC) coins.

[organofcorti]

This is costing bit minter?  This is costing myself?

It is costing to BitMinter, because they have to pay the tx fee. They can mitigate the fee by using transactions with many outputs, but the message size (that determines the fee) will increase anyway, so yes it is a cost for BitMinter.

But it is also costing you, because whenever you want to spend these small coins, you will have to pay a (sometimes much) higher transaction fee than if you were paying with bigger (like 0.5 BTC) coins.

If you get lots of little payments, it might cost you when you want to use them since the tx will be so large.

[Tranz]

So what is a good threshold for us little guys? .1 at 4gh/s?

[mdude77]

So what is a good threshold for us little guys? .1 at 4gh/s?

I use 0.25 for ~7.5gh.  Really the higher the better if you can tolerate it.

M

[matt4054]

I use 0.25 for ~7.5gh.  Really the higher the better if you can tolerate it.

Pretty much the same, payout at 0.3 for ~8 GH/s (and 3.0 for NMC)

[sturle]

So what is a good threshold for us little guys? .1 at 4gh/s?

I use 10 at 2 Ghash/s.

[Astrophysical]

I receive payouts at the lowest level and started sending them at first to btc-e, then didn't like their withdrawal fees, then to mcxnow where i quickly realized they were gettign eaten at under the minimum deposit and now they go straight to bitzino. yes, bitzino of all online sites / wallets to deposit is completely free to transact any amount including withdrawals. 

[LazyOtto]

Website is down.

For me.

-- edit

Just the website. My miners are still happy.

[whitefeather]

7.15 TH/s.

What happened to our big gun ASICs?

[daddyfatsax]

Website is down again. My miners are still connected.

[induktor]

Website is down again. My miners are still connected.

Yep, site down