~
I think if you have a different reward model that sufficiently incentive verifiers for their hard work, tiny/small fees and fast confirmation wouldn't be a problem. But you'll need to build something more advanced and well built to make this possible, efficient, easy, sustainable etc
Even though the halving of the block reward had occurred recently, miners are still getting much more from the block reward than from all the fees combined. Look at some latest blocks, for example:
Block 643661
![](https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FRqbQqyQ.png&t=665&c=ao6127i6MC_SFw)
Block 643660
![](https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FCzkgb19.png&t=665&c=IdWY99aL9ctJTA)
Block 643659
![](https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FzP4eju8.png&t=665&c=22HvNRTWwVhhUA)
(Note that sometimes the Fee Reward exceeds 1 BTC, but this happens very rare.)
Besides,
all fees will never be small. As it was proposed earlier in this thread by @kryptqnick, zero-conf transactions can be accepted for payments below $50, but people should pay higher fees when purchasing more expensive goods/services, or just transferring big amounts from one place to another, when they want it fast. So, the verifiers(miners) will be still incentivised. In the future, with more halvings, this situation can change, but actually it depends on the USD price of 1 BTC. It's possible that it will be so high that even 0.78125 BTC, the block reward we'll have after 2036, will be enough to incentivise hundreds thousands of miners.
Thought about this in the past, and I somewhat agree, as long as the fee is low but still passable(e.g. 5 sats/b). Of course though, this is for cheap merchant transactions like a $4 coffee and such(who the heck would double spend $4?).
imagine being able to easily double spend every low value transaction back to yourself. you don't think anyone would take advantage?
![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif)
if it can be exploited, it will be.
Theoretically, yes, but in reality not many people want to engage in criminal activity. It is possible to buy a counterfeit 100 Dollar bill of very good quality for $40-$60, and use it in places where it can't be detected(there are plenty of them), but not many people are willing to do that.
imagine being able to easily double spend every low value transaction back to yourself. you don't think anyone would take advantage?
![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif)
if it can be exploited, it will be.
I definitely don't disagree; but the incentive of people attempting a double-spend would greatly drop(in my opinion) if the transaction is done in person(hence I chose the coffee example). Attempting to double spend to get back $4-5 while risking jail time due to your identity being exposed(assuming the shop has a CCTV camera) isn't simply worth it in my opinion.
this is something i've always been curious about, and that we don't have legal precedent for. are we sure that double spending constitutes criminal fraud or a similar crime? this could make for a fascinating legal case.
the courts haven't established whether an
unconfirmed bitcoin payment constitutes money received, in the same way cashing a check or taking possession of cash would. i know i don't personally consider money received until a transaction is confirmed on the blockchain.
on top of that, there is also plausible deniability re who sent the double spend transaction. since multiple people can have access to the same private keys, can it be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that you double spent?Oh, c'mon, man! They confiscate your phone, computer, or whatever, and prove the guilt.