Fees are now low.. take advantage of bech32 full segwit and save

[Becky666]

Why big exchanges as binance still dont support segwit?

I think they're selfish and malicious in this regard, Binance exchnage is a big crypto platform and should understand stuffs like this and do the needful. Upgrade00 shared a link of recent interview with Binance CEO and his replies wasn't encouraging; as they won't implement this soon, but,  let be sincere, this exchange is big and not ready soon to implement this: interpret one thing to me as malicious.

[Twinkledoe]

Why big exchanges as binance still dont support segwit?

I think they're selfish and malicious in this regard, Binance exchnage is a big crypto platform and should understand stuffs like this and do the needful. Upgrade00 shared a link of recent interview with Binance CEO and his replies wasn't encouraging; as they won't implement this soon, but,  let be sincere, this exchange is big and not ready soon to implement this: interpret one thing to me as malicious.

Maybe if they will support segwit, clients will have the reason to ask for reduced fees and right now, they won't do that as it will decrease their income. Though they are already generating huge income. They need to think of business first but I really do hope they will change very soon.

[gmaxwell]

Exchanges make a lot of money by adding new scamcoins, scam-c-os, and scam-fi to pickup all the gamblers that bleed fees on rapid trading as well as gaining the astronomical listing fees they're able to collect from the creators of the many massively pre-mined coins.

Bitcoin generates a lot of money for exchanges too-- but it'll still generate just about as much money for them if they leave their Bitcoin support to rot, fall years out of date, and if they don't keep up with the latest technical improvements or best security practices.

Worse, many altcoins are constantly on fire with frequent (sometimes unexpected) hardforks, serious bugs, node software by sketchy anonymous authors, reorg attacks and often have gaps in basic functionality like usable multisig... so it's easy for those things to sop up what time they've budgeted for maintenance.

And it's not like they start with a lot of time/resources to spare: Handling fraud, KYC, legal requests, lost accounts, banking stupidity --- etc. It's a difficult business.  So it isn't a shock that they spend a lot of what they have left on whatever is most urgent and brings in the most money.  Because the Bitcoin ecosystem is in it for the long run and isn't a bunch of crazed mad people the urgency is usually kept to a minimum.

When they do make plans to upgrade their Bitcoin support they usually bake those plans into some grand rewrite-- their Bitcoin support was written first and is usually the most crufty-- which inevitably they never finish or finish so late that even the upgraded support is already out of date by the time they deploy it.

These moves build up technical and goodwill debt.  They may not feel the pain today, but when they're massively hacked because they didn't keep up with best practices, or when customers flock to a smaller competitor once it crosses a threshold size because they're tired of the family they recommend looking into Bitcoin getting sold scam ICOs when they log in and get tired of not even being able to use a default address from a two year old wallet--- their staff might be surprised.

But I won't be.


Many exchange business seems to have become focused on catering to cryptocurrecy-as-gambling: and I don't mean using gambling sites, I mean day trading among cryptocurrences itself as a form of gambling.  They're likely by far the most profitable customers.   These services now seem to take two main forms:  Ones which either list a multitude of ever more sketchy altcoins and ICOs,  or ones that list a few and avoid most of the most scummy stuff but offer various kinds of extremely leveraged margin or derivative product.  Both represent distinct ways of separating gullible customers from their money.  But I don't think business models that are mostly predicated on customers getting wrecked will do that well in the long run.  I think they've only gotten as far as they've gotten because the overall price increases have covered up a lot of the losses.

[gmaxwell]

See also: https://rusty.ozlabs.org/?p=607  [pardon the double post but its been a couple days since the last].

[gmaxwell]

It would be nice to make the segwit second layer solution, can be usable by average joe's. Cause right now its not really user friendly, and it takes time to learn the whole thing considering there are tons of different methods to use segwit.
It would greatly reduce fees from incoming volume of users in the future, if that's the case an upgrade from the devs is really needed.

What the heck are you talking about?

Users don't need to learn anything to use segwit... they just install a modern wallet and use it.

[vapourminer]

there is a disadvantage to consolidating all your addresses/inputs/whatevers. and that is say you have 10 btc spread in 20 or 30 addresses. maybe the most in one addy is 0.35 btc. if you send btc to someone from that addy thats all they see you have.. that 0.35 btc. if all had been consolidated that person now would know you have 10 btc.

i prefer a lot of various sized utxos to select from so that i can send just enough, and not give away how much coin i may have.

ill accept the extra cost.

edit: probably got some terminology wrong, feel free to correct please.

[SquirrelJulietGarden]

there is a disadvantage to consolidating all your addresses/inputs/whatevers. and that is say you have 10 btc spread in 20 or 30 addresses. maybe the most in one addy is 0.35 btc. if you send btc to someone from that addy thats all they see you have.. that 0.35 btc. if all had been consolidated that person now would know you have 10 btc.

i prefer a lot of various sized utxos to select from so that i can send just enough, and not give away how much coin i may have.

ill accept the extra cost.

edit: probably got some terminology wrong, feel free to correct please.

With my limited knowledge on consolidation, privacy, fee and mixing I think consolidation can be used to save your fee by reduce the size of transaction from 10 inputs to 1 output. You consolidate and prepare 1 output for later spending.

Consolidation is applied when fee is low and I don't feel reasons to consolidate if fee is not cheapest (1 satoshi per byte).

Privacy it is nonsense to consolidate all your inputs into 1 outputs if you don't plan to spend all of your bitcoin with a single transaction. Consolidate 10 inputs to have 10 BTC and at the end spend out only 0.35 BTC and the rest 0.65 BTC will be left in your wallet with a new change address. I don't it is a thing to do.

Consolidate and mixing are different but they have a common point. Consolidate or combine mixed coins can reduce your anonymity.

If I have 10 BTC, saving $5 dollar is not my big interest. I will make a few transactions if I want to keep up my anonymity.

That person made a transaction from 753 inputs (ignore how the person used terrible fee). https://blockstream.info/tx/3ba0c9eaf3185898164518cda7e3433d1d2049188d737f2b2a7e188aaeb8b4de

[Buttermellow]

<snip>

Due to complexity others will tend to use or store bitcoin in those centralized and custodial wallets or exchanges. Here in our local we use custodial wallet to which our btc holdings are secured by them and can be hold/freeze by them whenever they wanted. But we weren't afraid to it because we know that the exchange was being mandated or regulated by the authority concerns with the financial matters. So far, no problem had been encountered and we were only using or storing small amount of BTC in their wallet.

[pooya87]

<snip>

Due to complexity others will tend to use or store bitcoin in those centralized and custodial wallets or exchanges. Here in our local we use custodial wallet to which our btc holdings are secured by them and can be hold/freeze by them whenever they wanted. But we weren't afraid to it because we know that the exchange was being mandated or regulated by the authority concerns with the financial matters. So far, no problem had been encountered and we were only using or storing small amount of BTC in their wallet.

the problem is that some people have to learn everything the hard way. you keep telling them that fire is hot but they have to burn their hand to believe you!
as for regulation and the "authorities" they don't give a crap about security of user funds. all they care about is the information they gather about who does what and how much bitcoin they have.

[btctaipei]

as of Sun Nov 29 13:57:49 UTC 2020
blocks were not full (block#659229, 659230..659232.. )
mempools are well within 5MByte

BTC is nearall time high and for those trying to help out with circulations would need large set of anonymous UTXS ahead to fill decentralized in person trades.

by consolidate coins now you can avoid paying high fees in your future transactions by converting non segwit coins into open source custodial wallets with full segwit addresses (bech32 addresses).  Help spread the peak to save liveliness of BTC n00bs when people have no options and must send transactions on chain.