Sending your BTC what to pay.

[philipma1957]

go to this website

https://mempool.jhoenicke.de/#BTC,24h,weight


from link above 140 sats has a back log of about 2 blocks so it is iffy that you can get a tx sent at 140 sats









Look at this second link

https://mempool.jhoenicke.de/#BTC,24h,fee





It shows 200 sats as a possible working fee.

[1714517025]

1714517025

[1714517025]

1714517025

[1714517025]

1714517025

[LoyceV]

It shows 200 sats as a possible working fee.

That's how you end up paying $90 for a small transaction (923 bytes) with 6 legacy inputs.
I hate to say it, but Bitcoin is useless for sending transactions at the moment.

[philipma1957]

I did this so you can learn to use that website to get an idea of what to pay.

to those that do not understand 200 sat fee cost.

It is 200 x 165 when sending to bc1 address's or  0.00033000 or $14.55 for the least complex send

If I send a 1 input amount to a single bc1 address it is very expensive. and this is the lowest cost send.

It is 200 x 166 when sending to  3>>> address  or 0.0033200 or $14.64


Legacy old school cost the most

It is 200 x 168 when sending to a 1>>> address or 0.0033600 or $14.81

so  bc1 is 165 bytes         segwit  is this type of address
the 3xx is 166 bytes        Legacy segwit is this type of address
and 1xx is 168 bytes        Legacy is this type of address

you best friend if you are looking to move btc coins on the chain is to look at these two links

https://mempool.jhoenicke.de/#BTC,24h,weight



https://mempool.jhoenicke.de/#BTC,24h,fee

you can get an idea of what to spend or just hodl.

In these times I use DOGE and LTC for Low cost sends.

Some say USE Lightening Network if you have tech skills and are prepped you can try it.

But I have been doing this for over 10 years and prefer Doge and LTC when btc is too costly

[LoyceV]

Some say USE Lightening Network if you have tech skills and are prepped you can try it.

If you don't have tech skills, use any of the easy LN mobile wallets. Phoenix Wallet for instance (although on-chain channel opening is costly at the moment), or one of the custodial wallets (but only risk small amounts in them) so you don't need anything on-chain. For instance: Wallet of Satoshi. Then use your favourite low-fee altcoin to get LN-funds from an instant exchanger.

[apogio]

For instance: Wallet of Satoshi.

I was against WoS because of it being custodial.

After 6 months, I can say I use it more than my own LN node. It works flawlessly for me, due to the fact thar WoS nodes are connected with a ton of nodes. So sometimes, if I wanna pay someone, I will try to use my own node but there have been times where I couldn't pay due to the fact that there was no payment route between me and the other end. With WoS I never had this issue.

So today, I am in favor of using the WoS. It's smooth and works well. But yeah... custodial solution...

[LoyceV]

So today, I am in favor of using the WoS. It's smooth and works well. But yeah... custodial solution...

For small amounts, I don't mind. Compared to the amount of money people keep in exchanges, it's tiny.
I haven't tried it, but you can probably fund it from an exchange directly. Imagine topping up your Bitcoin LN wallet with a 5 sat transaction fee

[apogio]

So today, I am in favor of using the WoS. It's smooth and works well. But yeah... custodial solution...

For small amounts, I don't mind. Compared to the amount of money people keep in exchanges, it's tiny.
I haven't tried it, but you can probably fund it from an exchange directly. Imagine topping up your Bitcoin LN wallet with a 5 sat transaction fee

What is more curious, however, is that even when I have an open channel with WoS's node, sometimes payments fail from my node, but succeed from WoS app. Anyway, I will figure this out when I have the time.

Sending funds from an exchange directly to WoS sounds good, but I don't use exchanges since I met you guys here  I was tought not to... WoS has a built-in button that you can use to buy BTC from MoonPay. I have no idea how it works though. And I won't try it, I guess.

[WhyFhy]

So today, I am in favor of using the WoS. It's smooth and works well. But yeah... custodial solution...

For small amounts, I don't mind. Compared to the amount of money people keep in exchanges, it's tiny.
I haven't tried it, but you can probably fund it from an exchange directly. Imagine topping up your Bitcoin LN wallet with a 5 sat transaction fee

over the years has your sats stacked enough to make running a node worth it ?
I've been intending on running one on a pi with eclair or something more current and opening a small channel but there isn't enough time in a day these days. I can barely participate here at the moment. I just pop in now and then.

[philipma1957]

For instance: Wallet of Satoshi.

I was against WoS because of it being custodial.

After 6 months, I can say I use it more than my own LN node. It works flawlessly for me, due to the fact thar WoS nodes are connected with a ton of nodes. So sometimes, if I wanna pay someone, I will try to use my own node but there have been times where I couldn't pay due to the fact that there was no payment route between me and the other end. With WoS I never had this issue.

So today, I am in favor of using the WoS. It's smooth and works well. But yeah... custodial solution...

this is why I prefer Sending Doge to LTC.

BTC could free the blockchain by no sends smaller than 0.0005 btc that is 21 or 22 usd.

Pick what ever number you want.

The btc number could be adjusted when needed.

The reality is small sends do not belong on the main chain.  And at this moment in time L N is not developed enough for most people.

[LoyceV]

BTC could free the blockchain by no sends smaller than 0.0005 btc that is 21 or 22 usd.

That would mean increasing the dust limit 100-fold.

There are currently 22747542 Bitcoin addresses with less 0.0005BTC (using yesterday's data). That's 44% of all funded Bitcoin addresses, holding 2593.58118332BTC in total.
I don't think the protocol needs to exclude those small Bitcoin owners. At current fees, their inputs are too small to send anyway.

I'm more for education, like my "consolidate small inputs" topic. People should try to avoid receiving small amounts of Bitcoin. Whenever possible, use small change for something else. Be smart on manually using coin control. Wait for regular payments to reach a larger amounts (mining pools could educate their small miners on this). Or indeed, just use low-fee altcoins for some payments. But that's not the scaling solution Bitcoin needs.

[paid2]

philipma don't you think that mempool.space would be a more "beginner-friendly" option?



I mean, from the point of view of someone starting with BTC things, it looks more intuitive to just read the sat/vB amounts (the range in yellow on my screenshot) of the next blocks and to adjust (or not) the fee thanks to these values


Monero is a good alternative for small amounts transactions, when BTC fees are high, just like LTC indeed. DAI (or any other coin) on Polygon network is a solid solution too IMO, for people searching for cheap transactions fees (even if sometimes it doesn't work as promised...)
But I prefer to wait patiently for the right time to spend BTC, than to have to anticipate high fees weeks by holding any altcoin.

Otherwise, for those looking for a privacy focused exchanger that allows you to swap BTC on-chain to LN, there is exch.cx which works well.

[hosseinimr93]

from link above 140 sats has a back log of about 2 blocks so it is iffy that you can get a tx sent at 140 sats

8 blocks, not 2 blocks.

According to the first chart, if you set the fee rate to 140 sat/vbyte, you should wait for at least 8 blocks.
Note that each block can include up to 1 vMB of transactions.

--------------

I couldn't understand how you got those numbers.
Here are my calculations for the case the fee rate used for the transaction is 200 sat/vbyte.

1 legacy input and 1 legacy output: 191 sat, 38,200 sat
1 legacy input and 1 nested segwit output: 189 sat, 37,800 sat
1 legacy input and 1 native segwit output: 188 sat, 37,600 sat


1 nested segwit input and 1 legacy output: 135 vbyte, 27,000 sat
1 nested segwit input and 1 nested segwit output: 133 sat, 26,600 sat
1 nested segwit input and 1 native segwit output: 132 sat, 26,400 sat

1 native segwit input and 1 legacy output: 112 sat, 22,400 sat
1 native segwit input and 1 nested segwit output:  110 vbyte, 22,000 sat
1 native segwit input and 1 native segwit output: 109 vbyte, 21,800 sat

[Catenaccio]

go to this website

https://mempool.jhoenicke.de/#BTC,24h,weight

When I see this link, I thought it is a clone of https://jochen-hoenicke.de/queue/#BTC%20(default%20mempool),24h,weight

I really thought so but by checking donation addresses at bottoms of two websites, I changed my mind and thought they are from a same person.

I think you can use both links for your guide.

[Lucius]

~snip~
I hate to say it, but Bitcoin is useless for sending transactions at the moment.

You don't mean all transactions regardless of their value, do you? I can agree that it doesn't make sense to pay (currently) $4+ to send any amount up to $50, but is $4 for a quick confirmation too much if you're sending several hundred or even thousands of $?

Besides, there's always a way to pay less even for an on-chain transaction if you don't need instant confirmation, and I've kept all my fees around $1 this whole mempool frenzy - of course all thanks to that one accelerator that still works.

[LoyceV]

You don't mean all transactions regardless of their value, do you? I can agree that it doesn't make sense to pay (currently) $4+ to send any amount up to $50, but is $4 for a quick confirmation too much if you're sending several hundred or even thousands of $?

That's still $4 more than I'd pay if I use my bank account, and still more than the €1 exchanges charge for SEPA transfers.

Besides, there's always a way to pay less even for an on-chain transaction if you don't need instant confirmation, and I've kept all my fees around $1 this whole mempool frenzy - of course all thanks to that one accelerator that still works.

I know the tricks, but that's not how I'd like Bitcoin to work.
ViaBTC has a new captcha, now they're not instantly out of accelerations anymore.

[philipma1957]

from link above 140 sats has a back log of about 2 blocks so it is iffy that you can get a tx sent at 140 sats

8 blocks, not 2 blocks.

According to the first chart, if you set the fee rate to 140 sat/vbyte, you should wait for at least 8 blocks.
Note that each block can include up to 1 vMB of transactions.

--------------

I couldn't understand how you got those numbers.
Here are my calculations for the case the fee rate used for the transaction is 200 sat/vbyte.

1 legacy input and 1 legacy output: 191 sat, 38,200 sat
1 legacy input and 1 nested segwit output: 189 sat, 37,800 sat
1 legacy input and 1 native segwit output: 188 sat, 37,600 sat


1 nested segwit input and 1 legacy output: 135 vbyte, 27,000 sat
1 nested segwit input and 1 nested segwit output: 133 sat, 26,600 sat
1 nested segwit input and 1 native segwit output: 132 sat, 26,400 sat

1 native segwit input and 1 legacy output: 112 sat, 22,400 sat
1 native segwit input and 1 nested segwit output:  110 vbyte, 22,000 sat
1 native segwit input and 1 native segwit output: 109 vbyte, 21,800 sat

I used my trezor set it to 1 sat and set it to 200 sats. custom fees

edit
but you do bring up a good point.

all tests used a bc1  address

to legacy >>>>>>>>>>> address is 14xxx but with a 1 to start
to legacy segwit >>>>>>> address is 3xxxx with a 3 to start
to segwit >>>>>>>>>>> address is bc1xxxxx with a bc to start


there are so many ways to do a send.

there are 3 kinds of addresses.

so empty the input address and it was a 1 input address already merged
send all to 1 address

this means 1 input 1 output

but since there are 3 types of addresses that nine kinds of sends for the simplest send

next 1 input 2 outputs. 
all my examples are using a trezor with 1 input address and 2 output addresses.

Ie an address with say 0.12345678 btc sends 0.1 to a seller of whatever. so he is send 0.1 to the seller and 0.023xxxxx back to his own wallet but a different address.

I only showed that with a:

 segwit (bc1) to a {segwit (bc1) my change back address} and the sellers segwit address
 segwit (bc1) to a {segwit (bc1) my change back address} and the sellers legacy segwit address
 segwit (bc1) to a {segwit (bc1)  my change back address} and the sellers legacy address

So simple send combinations

are 1 in fully merged and 2 out  9 kinds
are 1 in fully merged and 1 out 9 kinds

so there are 18 simple sends (never mind LN)

once you deal with complex sends it is pretty much infinite variation of what pay will be.

Ie 5 unmerged in a bc1 fully paid 50/50 to 2 outputs.
or 5 unmerged in a bc1 fully paid 33/33/33 to 3 outputs
pretty much endless payout rules. I could write 500 different combos.

which means LN needs to be easy peasy it is not
the blockchain for now needs to restrict dust payments.

Or use LTC and Doge.

[Synchronice]

I did this so you can learn to use that website to get an idea of what to pay.

Mempool.space shows you that chart too, so, no need to visit another website and to be honest, mempool.space calculates fees very well, it is super great. Also, mempool.space gives you the possibility to view blocks yourself to see transactions with fees that are getting included in upcoming blocks. The only moment when mempool.space's suggested fee might not be correct is when block has to be mined in 10 minutes but instead of gets mined in 40 minutes and another case is when block gets mined quickly after the previous block, it looks like you have paid more than it was necessary but it's not mempool.space's fault to be honest.

Just to summarize, mempool.space has no competitor when it comes to bitcoin transaction fees estimation.

[Lucius]

You don't mean all transactions regardless of their value, do you? I can agree that it doesn't make sense to pay (currently) $4+ to send any amount up to $50, but is $4 for a quick confirmation too much if you're sending several hundred or even thousands of $?

That's still $4 more than I'd pay if I use my bank account, and still more than the €1 exchanges charge for SEPA transfers.

These are the facts and there is no doubt about it, but even though I don't want to pay for fees more than what the bank or some money transfer service would charge me, if I have to choose between paying the bank or the miner, I will still choose Bitcoin. I've always thought of Bitcoin as a currency, and unless the fees get crazy I'll continue to look for ways to use it that way.

ViaBTC has a new captcha, now they're not instantly out of accelerations anymore.

I'm glad they did, because I'm pretty sure they did it to prevent bots from exploiting them - and as someone who has had the opportunity to solve various captchas, I'm always looking forward to new challenges

[PrivacyG]

It is bad.  Very bad.

People already pay a lot of money to sit on top of the Mempool.  Then I presume a LOT of people recently started paying for 'Accelerator Services'.  ViaBTC is great if you are not spending often or when you have the comfort of being able to stay in the queue in case the Accelerator is filled with requests.  But I wonder how long this takes before some Miners start offering some sort of subscriptions.  Unless they already exist and I am not aware of them.

Then think about it.  Think 100 companies spending every 30 minutes or so.  They all pay the subscription and they are pretty much now the only included Transactions in the Blocks mined by the said Miner.  The rest of us pay exceedingly large Fees unless we start paying subscriptions too.  And even that does not guarantee we get a confirmation on the first Block they mine.

This situation could launch some things that would easily make it impossible for the normies to ever spend their Bitcoin again.  It sucks.

[WillyAp]

Advantage Litecoin
Swapping is in fashion, so it seems, when looking at network activities.