Bitcoin and Micropayments

[natman3400]

I'm still using version 0.3.22 (can't upgrade for some reason). If I try and send .01 or .02 BTC, I get an "over size limit" note. I always figured this meant the amount was too small, as I didn't get the note if I sent 1 BTC or more. I pay the fee and it works for a small amount like .01 BTC and it sends OK. But the BTC comes from one or maybe two addresses, not dozens. So how come it is "over the size limit"? I used to think this was some developer's bad English and it should have said "under the size limit" (i.e., too small), but apparently not. But it acts like that *is* what it means.

You need to upgrade NOW.

And yes, it's poorly worded and should be fixed.

Didn't he just say he can't?

[1713938836]

1713938836

[1713938836]

1713938836

[Alex Beckenham]

I'm still using version 0.3.22 (can't upgrade for some reason). If I try and send .01 or .02 BTC, I get an "over size limit" note. I always figured this meant the amount was too small, as I didn't get the note if I sent 1 BTC or more. I pay the fee and it works for a small amount like .01 BTC and it sends OK. But the BTC comes from one or maybe two addresses, not dozens. So how come it is "over the size limit"? I used to think this was some developer's bad English and it should have said "under the size limit" (i.e., too small), but apparently not. But it acts like that *is* what it means.

You need to upgrade NOW.

And yes, it's poorly worded and should be fixed.

Didn't he just say he can't?

If he can't upgrade, then perhaps downgrading is an option.

0.3.20.2 doesn't have this issue.

[spruce]

If he can't upgrade, then perhaps downgrading is an option.

0.3.20.2 doesn't have this issue.

OK, thanks. I'll probably wait till v4.0 comes along, then if I still can't do it just zero out my wallet and delete everything (with BTC safely stored somewhere else) and start again from scratch.

[elements]

Why not use a redeemable MtGox code?

As far as I know you can create one for any BTC amount for free and then send the code via email to the recipient who then can redeem it at his/her MtGox account for free.

[Littleshop]

Just to put another nail in the coffin, lets calculate what that fee is at current rates. Round it off to $13.70 send multiply by 0.0005 and you get roughly 7 tenths of a cent. So yes, you can send 1 cents worth of bitcoins, but it will cost you 7 tenths of a cent.

That's ok-ish for now. A 10 cent transaction would have a 7% fee, a 5 cent transaction would be 14%. Those are high, but probably workable (after all, Apple has proven that 30% fees don't kill an ecosystem (yikes)). Problem is, fees are going to get higher as mining bounty drops off, and as there's more and more competition for speedy transactions.

And again, nothing else even comes close to Bitcoin here.  You can send 10 cents with a fee that is less then a penny.  We are talking about a penny here.  This is not going to stop any business model I know of from succeeding. 

[cunicula]

One of the potential benefits of bitcoin is in enabling cost-effective micropayments. At least, in theory. In practice, will transaction fees have to evolve to the point where they make micropayments just as infeasible as they are today? That is, when there's little new-coin reward for mining a block and transaction volume is high (causing fees to be non-trivial), will transaction fees be to high to send micropayments without losing a huge percentage of the payment?

Yes micropayments will not work with the current protocol. In diollar terms fees will skyrocket unless the protocol is changed.

[netrin]

The current fee message is displayed in the C++ client if the transaction is large (bytes), contains recent transacted addresses, or has too low bitcoin value. The later is due to fear of clients spamming the network (which frankly is not something that the client can/should inhibit). And no Error, the transaction fee is not optional in the Satoshi client. If your transaction is too large (kb), unconfirmed, or too low (btc), you must pay or the transaction fails, YES=send with transaction. NO=don't send.

I expect with the new clients coming out that the required transaction fees will disappear and the market network will be allowed to decide the price/speed. As for micropayments, I'm more concerned about confirmation time. Even waiting ten minutes or an hour for confirmations will inhibit transactions without third party tools. What is so 'holy' about ten minute block targets?

[Melbustus]

Just to put another nail in the coffin, lets calculate what that fee is at current rates. Round it off to $13.70 send multiply by 0.0005 and you get roughly 7 tenths of a cent. So yes, you can send 1 cents worth of bitcoins, but it will cost you 7 tenths of a cent.

That's ok-ish for now. A 10 cent transaction would have a 7% fee, a 5 cent transaction would be 14%. Those are high, but probably workable (after all, Apple has proven that 30% fees don't kill an ecosystem (yikes)). Problem is, fees are going to get higher as mining bounty drops off, and as there's more and more competition for speedy transactions.

And again, nothing else even comes close to Bitcoin here.  You can send 10 cents with a fee that is less then a penny.  We are talking about a penny here.  This is not going to stop any business model I know of from succeeding. 

Sure, it may be less than a penny, but it's 7%, in that example. That's hardly trivial. Credit Card companies are currently considered to take a big chunk and their fees avg somewhere between 1% and 3%. Plus, the fees are probably going to rise as transaction volumes grow and the btc mining bounty falls. Bitcoin may not suffice for microtransactions.