-

[uvwvj]

.

[1715612059]

1715612059

[1715612059]

1715612059

[1715612059]

1715612059

[1715612059]

1715612059

[flyguy]

I think a good number to look towards for decimal moves is $1,000 USD on stamp.   It just sounds about right.

[fiddelingones]

I guess more patience is needed to see if the price is stable first
Try this question early next year 

[Barek]

Call it whatever you want? Just use the unit that is appropriate.

Let me guess, not a metric system user?

[tutkarz]

Some people (me included) are trying for months to convince people to do similar change, but what we suggest is to make 100 satoshi as 1 XBT
That way you could type 1.00XBT = 100 satoshi or 1 BTC = 1,000,000.00 XBT. Our proposal is good because it will last for long time and people wont have to switch from milli to micro BTC any more.

Its really easy to make mistake sending 0.008000 or 0.000800 its not only confusing but also irreversible in bitcoin world thats why i think it's important especially for newcomers.

[cdtc]

I completely agree now that bitcoin has such a high value fees are just too big.

[Abdussamad]

Right now the transaction fee comes to around Rs. 4.30 or 4 US cents. Since micro transactions are supposed to be one of bitcoin's selling points this fee is too high. If you want to send somebody Rs. 10 you are basically paying more than 40% in fees. Yeah I know no one does that yet but if BTC spreads there might be a use case for that.

[dserrano5]

Right now the transaction fee comes to around Rs. 4.30 or 4 US cents. Since micro transactions are supposed to be one of bitcoin's selling points this fee is too high. If you want to send somebody Rs. 10 you are basically paying more than 40% in fees. Yeah I know no one does that yet but if BTC spreads there might be a use case for that.

Gavin has pointed out several times that micropayments aren't a core feature of bitcoin. And they can be achieved via off-chain transactions after all, maybe fee-free.

[Abdussamad]

Gavin has pointed out several times that micropayments aren't a core feature of bitcoin. And they can be achieved via off-chain transactions after all, maybe fee-free.

Ok I don't religiously follow everything he says so I didn't know.

Another thing that needs looking at is this rule here about when transaction fees are required:

"A transaction may be safely sent without fees if these conditions are met:

    It is smaller than 10,000 bytes.
    All outputs are 0.01 BTC or larger.
    Its priority is large enough (see the Technical Info section below)

Transactions need to have a priority above 57,600,000 to avoid the enforced limit (as of client version 0.3.21). This threshold is written in the code as COIN * 144 / 250, suggesting that the threshold represents a one day old, 1 btc coin (144 is the expected number of blocks per day) and a transaction size of 250 bytes. "

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Transaction_fees

So two things that need to be looked at. The rule of 0.01 output and the transaction priority value of 57 mill which is based on the idea of sending a single 1 day old bitcoin. With bitcoin exceeding $400 we can do a lot of significant transactions that will require fees if these hard limits are not addressed.

And don't say that this only applies to bitcoin-qt. All the miners are using bitcoin-qt so these rules apply to everyone.

[lucaspm98]

Yes, of course, the transaction fees must decrease as the value rises. What is just dust now could be worth much more in the future.

[xan_The_Dragon]

you cant just lower transaction fees, they are determined by supply and demand

[Abdussamad]

Yes, of course, the transaction fees must decrease as the value rises. What is just dust now could be worth much more in the future.

More than that it has to change automatically and not be dependent on periodic updates by the development teams of qt and other wallets. The reason is that we will see faster and faster increases in the value of bitcoin and the development teams will not be able to keep up. So it has to be automated based on some combination of market price (which may not be possible or too dangerous) or maybe based on difficulty which is also rising.

[Abdussamad]

you cant just lower transaction fees, they are determined by supply and demand

In theory that is correct. But you've got these default amounts in wallets and rules for judging when transaction fees must be paid that are hard coded into the wallet that all the miners are using. So you have to remove these rules or make them adjust automatically to current conditions.

[dserrano5]

you cant just lower transaction fees, they are determined by supply and demand

In theory that is correct. But you've got these default amounts in wallets and rules for judging when transaction fees must be paid that are hard coded into the wallet that all the miners are using. So you have to remove these rules or make them adjust automatically to current conditions.

It's not really even correct when the minimum transaction fee is set through price fixing agreements made by an oligopoly of suppliers.

They're working on new, dynamic rules for fees. I believe we'll see them in 0.9.

[Kazimir]

Inclined to vote 'screw it TO DA MOOON' but I think switching to mBTC and lowering the default fee are both good ideas.

Currently I'd say a default fee of about 0.00001 ~ 0.00005 BTC sounds about right.

This also helps holding the argument for Bitcoin over fiat that transactions are virtually free.

As for mBTC, more and more I notice people with the psychological resistance to spend €300+ "for a single coin". Also, a pizza for 30 mBTC appears much more acceptable and practical than 0.03 BTC.