Small transactions?

[JA37]

So it's not possible to send small transactions in the network? Sending 0.1 or 0.01 BTC has a fee that is unskippable. I can't choose to not pay the fee and wait until some node will process the transaction "for free"?

[1714184172]

1714184172

[1714184172]

1714184172

[finway]

Sure, you can't make your own client.

[JA37]

Sure, you can't make your own client.

Short and pointless. Thanks for your input. 

[finway]

Sorry, i mean
sure you can,  you can make you own client,
or you can send a big amount of BTCs to Instawallet (no fee),
then send 0.01 each with no fee from Instawallet.

[JA37]

Alas, if I only had a large number of BTC to send.


Not knowing how the protocol works here's how I'd like it to work. 

When you send a small transaction you can choose to pay fee or not. If you choose not to pay fee you specify how many blocks you're willing to wait for it to clear. If your transaction isn't handled when that number of blocks have passed, your coins are returned to the address you sent it from.

Example:
I want to send a small amount, and not pay any fee, so I'll specify that I'll wait 36 blocks, or about 6 hours for the transaction to clear.

[julz]

Alas, if I only had a large number of BTC to send.


Not knowing how the protocol works here's how I'd like it to work. 

When you send a small transaction you can choose to pay fee or not. If you choose not to pay fee you specify how many blocks you're willing to wait for it to clear. If your transaction isn't handled when that number of blocks have passed, your coins are returned to the address you sent it from.

Example:
I want to send a small amount, and not pay any fee, so I'll specify that I'll wait 36 blocks, or about 6 hours for the transaction to clear.

I'd love to see something like this too.
It's probably security concerns regarding cheap spam attacks on the network that have prevented development of better support for proper microtransactions, but perhaps also the fact that user interface convenience isn't currently a priority.

[Pieter Wuille]

Bitcoin is not intended for microtransactions. Since all transaction are publicly maintained and verified, this has a significant cost to the network. This is a price many consider worth it, in exchange for having a medium that has all the properties Bitcoin provides, but it is not neglectable.

If you want to do microtransactions (in the long term) over bitcoin, I believe third-party services will be required, which can perform such transaction with far smaller overhead internally.

[JA37]

I'd love to see something like this too.
It's probably security concerns regarding cheap spam attacks on the network that have prevented development of better support for proper microtransactions, but perhaps also the fact that user interface convenience isn't currently a priority.

Spam attacks are only possible if the transaction clears, isn't it? If the transaction is reversed in X blocks because no nodes would accept it without a fee, then there would be no spam attack?
And I'm not really talking about microtransactions. If BTC ever hits $300, then sending 0.01 BTC or even 0.001 BTC isn't that unthinkable.

[julz]

I'd love to see something like this too.
It's probably security concerns regarding cheap spam attacks on the network that have prevented development of better support for proper microtransactions, but perhaps also the fact that user interface convenience isn't currently a priority.

Spam attacks are only possible if the transaction clears, isn't it? If the transaction is reversed in X blocks because no nodes would accept it without a fee, then there would be no spam attack?
And I'm not really talking about microtransactions. If BTC ever hits $300, then sending 0.01 BTC or even 0.001 BTC isn't that unthinkable.

I don't know about the technical details of whether failed transactions can also be part of a spam problem.

If BTC exchange values were so high - then there would presumably be no problem for the devs to release clients that allowed low/no fees on 0.01, 0.001 BTC etc because the cost of spamming at those levels would be higher.   
The fee settings have changed in the past and can change again.