The Whole Concept of Bitcoin is Failing!

[usekevin]

first of all to say that bitcoin’s whole concept is being the cheapest payment system may not be the most accurate bitcoin was made purposefully to be used as digital payment but without any third party

now getting that away it is truly worrisome that there seems to be no way around these high fees if bitcoin was used as intended like being used in daily transactions then it will be more congested it seems like the only way right now is to either pay high or do your transactions in times where the blockchain is not busy hopefully developers can soon implement a system where it will allow for faster transactions

The bitcoin was not created to made the cheap payment fee,it was created to make the digital for of currency and the digital payment.Both the digital payment and digital currency concept of the bitcoin was remains same.The only things changed was the bitcoin transaction fee from the beginning stage to now,I had seen the bitcoin transaction fee from the trust wallet itself 29$.So how the forum people who get the payment of 30$ will withdraw their payment to the exchange.It’s almost not possible,or he need to afford of one week payment.Lol

I thought that 2017 was the toughest but it's also nice because we're in the bull run by that time. Toughest as the fees was terrible back then but no it's not the worst but we've got this time more expensive fees. But it still varies and changing from time to time and I'm still in the hope that even with these ordis, sats and other brc20 tokens, we'll still see some light soon. It's not just the right time because they're in demand. What I am thinking right now, we deal with inflation in the real world whilst Bitcoin is a deflationary asset, the inflation that we deal IRL is the fees that we deal here for Bitcoin and transactions that we do. Well, I'm just looking at the brighter side of it that we'll see a new ATH as this could be the indication of it although we didn't experienced this a lot on 2021 bull run.

The year 2017 was biggest remarkable one,during that time the bitcoin had achieved the biggest target of 19k dollars.Which was the highest price of the bitcoin over a decade from the beginning of bitcoin origin.Many new people also get into the forum from 2017-2019 and made the Bitcoin community a wide range community.

[1714749173]

1714749173

[1714749173]

1714749173

[1714749173]

1714749173

[1714749173]

1714749173

[1714749173]

1714749173

[The Cryptovator]

First of all, transaction fees ultimately increase when the price of bitcoin increases. At that time, the Bitcoin network became congested, and most of the time we calculated transaction fees in USD. The current network is congested due to a few BRC20 tokens, and it has become hype. So when the hype is over, the network will be normal. Basically, we can't prevent anyone from using the Bitcoin network. But we have to wait to end the hype and trend. These projects would dry out day by day, I believe. Otherwise, miners and developers have to find an alternative solution to reduce the fees.

[darkangel11]

The fees are becoming so worrisome and not making sense anymore with this crazy fees, as it is gradually shifting from what it used to be before, the cheap transactions fees we used to have back days, and I wonder what would be the transaction fees and the kind of network congestion we would experience going further as we haven't even hit the main bull market where we would likely have Bitcoin trading around $100k+ — $250k+ price per Bitcoin. This issue needs to be fixed with urgent attention, else the average Joe wouldn't be able to get their hands on Bitcoin because of its high fees when they think about how much they would spend on fees to get a small amount of BTC and seem it's where we are heading to and if care is not taken.

You talk like this has never happened before. It has!



This is the average fee chart. This thing happens every few years every time there are people like you who say it's over, bitcoin needs to fix it or it's done and guess what, it wasn't done before and it's not done now. IMO bitcoin is robust and has a great way of overcoming with all difficulties on its path.
I don't care about fees. Let the Ordinals gang overpay until they run out of money. No sane person will pay $100 for a transaction.

[Mate2237]

Op you have discussed my mind these days. People have said this time without number. People that accepting Bitcoin having issue for the transaction so I think they are using another coins for the transaction fee. And worst part of it is the developers are not saying and doing anything upon all the problem that is going on. Is it that they are benefiting from the ordinals. From my understanding of Bitcoin, it is a digital currency which is wise to pay goods and services but with this how can someone pay with bitcoin. Really I am not happy with this transaction fee issue.

[Ojima-ojo]

Op you have discussed my mind these days. People have said this time without number. People that accepting Bitcoin having issue for the transaction so I think they are using another coins for the transaction fee. And worst part of it is the developers are not saying and doing anything upon all the problem that is going on. Is it that they are benefiting from the ordinals. From my understanding of Bitcoin, it is a digital currency which is wise to pay goods and services but with this how can someone pay with bitcoin. Really I am not happy with this transaction fee issue.

Look, the thing is that, bitcoin is about freedom, the developers taking away ordinals will be like censoring them, which may not be right when we try to look at the fact that we all have been advertising bitcoin to be the only true decentralized blockchain, decentralized in the sense that, its owned by the entire community of bitcoin holders, and if you check, those who built and running the ordinals are also bitcoin holders too, which means they also own the bitcoin blockchain as well.

What I do think is the final solution to this whole menace of high transaction fees, which have become buggling, is for micro bitcoin payments be done over the bitcoin lightening network, it's time for use to massively adopt the bitcoin lightening network rather than have to pay alot of fees for small bitcoin transactions.
The main chain, which is the L1 can preserved for those who are transacting in but amount of bitcoin, and will without any complain of high fees, pay what ever amount of fees they have to pay to have their transactions confirmed.

[goldkingcoiner]

Yes the whole ordinal situation is very frustrating and makes Bitcoin transaction fees higher than they need to be, but it is not Bitcoin-Breaking. In fact, Bitcoin transaction fees were never the lowest. If your only goal is low fees, then altcoins have always won out in that regard.

Bitcoin is for people seeking sanctuary from government/banking regulatory fascism, inflationary corruption and third-party money storage dependence. And it has been proven to be reliable and secure since 2009. That is almost 15 years of no hacks, no exploits and no corruption. Altcoins, on the other hand, require trust. Their fancy blockchain concepts tend to fall apart quite quickly. We see it happen almost monthly. Not to mention the insane price instability. If you want to risk losing your money in exchange for low transaction fees, go ahead.

The high fees from Bitcoin NFTs are definitely worth it. Although Bitcoin would be better off without NFTs.

[Captain Corporate]

Nobody ever said that bitcoins greatest feature is cheap form of transactions. That has never been the case, and if you really want to be precise about it, take a look at the transaction fees at 2021 and you will see that they are not really the same. I get that some people will think that transaction fees are a lot and they will complain about it, but that has been the case for bitcoin for many many years, it hasn't changed at all, when its in bear market it goes down, so some people forget that it used to be high, but in every bull period the fees are super high. We have that know and its not even 2024, because in 2024 and specially in 2025 there is a possibility that it will be even higher than this.

[tabas]

I thought that 2017 was the toughest but it's also nice because we're in the bull run by that time. Toughest as the fees was terrible back then but no it's not the worst but we've got this time more expensive fees. But it still varies and changing from time to time and I'm still in the hope that even with these ordis, sats and other brc20 tokens, we'll still see some light soon. It's not just the right time because they're in demand. What I am thinking right now, we deal with inflation in the real world whilst Bitcoin is a deflationary asset, the inflation that we deal IRL is the fees that we deal here for Bitcoin and transactions that we do. Well, I'm just looking at the brighter side of it that we'll see a new ATH as this could be the indication of it although we didn't experienced this a lot on 2021 bull run.

The year 2017 was biggest remarkable one,during that time the bitcoin had achieved the biggest target of 19k dollars.Which was the highest price of the bitcoin over a decade from the beginning of bitcoin origin.Many new people also get into the forum from 2017-2019 and made the Bitcoin community a wide range community.

Don't forget about the fees were also high during that time IIRC. And not just for Bitcoin but also for altcoins like Ethereum, those days were like the first time in history to experience those dramatic fees gone up. Although we've felt that already before, this time is way too different from that because this way is worse than the past.

Nobody ever said that bitcoins greatest feature is cheap form of transactions.

While that's true but it was like one of the attributes of Bitcoin before when fees like a few centavos. And I've witnessed those days before when they're totally cheap then comes next the boasting of altcoins having cheap fees. But it's true that's not the case better as soon as there's a clog on their networks, they can't skip to have these horrible increase in fees.

[kojektea]

If he initially used Bitcoin as an alternative payment, it should have worked, but he only got it as an alternative payment on a dark site at that time. When it was published it was restricted in several countries to protect the country's original currency, but even so, Bitcoin is still said to be successful in attracting many investors into this coin. No matter how public Bitcoin is, it still gets permission as a commodity asset where everyone has the right to use it as an investment tool. I conclude that Bitcoin has not failed, but it has changed its direction for the progress of Bitcoin and is easier to adopt in all countries.

[nelson4lov]

This os exactly the reason why Bitcoin was not made for compute. It was made to be a simple settlement ledger to handle transactions. Using Bitcoin to compute and create things is only going to bloat the blockchain and keep fees continously high. It's the reasons we have multiple layers of blockchain on Ethereum simply because most of the transactions that originates from the EVM simple adds to transaction volumes and bumps up tx costs. It's the same thing we're experiencing with Bitcoin. Unless Bitcoin Developers manages to build a temp network or like an L2 for facilitating these Ordinals transactions, we'd still be plagued with these issues.

[panganib999]

Bro, we've been dealing with transaction fee problems since time immemorial, I don't think there's anything that's so different between 2021 and now. And I'm not saying it is not a problem cause it is, and it's already taking a massive toll upon the whole situation of bitcoin as we know it and would even cause bigger problems in the future but to tell you the truth, transaction fees and wait times are only a symptom of this larger problem that has been in discussion for over a decade now. Scalability.

Bitcoin is supposed to be scalable, at least in its model but because of the upsurge of users from over the years, not to mention the countless attempts at reinventing the wheel and hoping to bring new reason to invest in bitcoin apart from "it's very profitable", network congestion has been a problem for over a decade now. Now to me, that is a more important problem to find a solution for cause that will solve all problems that bitcoin have and will have.

[Sanitough]

The fees are becoming so worrisome and not making sense anymore with this crazy fees, as it is gradually shifting from what it used to be before, the cheap transactions fees we used to have back days, and I wonder what would be the transaction fees and the kind of network congestion we would experience going further as we haven't even hit the main bull market where we would likely have Bitcoin trading around $100k+ — $250k+ price per Bitcoin. This issue needs to be fixed with urgent attention, else the average Joe wouldn't be able to get their hands on Bitcoin because of its high fees when they think about how much they would spend on fees to get a small amount of BTC and seem it's where we are heading to and if care is not taken.

I believe this is not the first time that we experienced a congested market and see the transaction fees crazily surging its price. So the best solution I think is learn to minimize your transactions while transaction fees is not cheap. You can do it bimonthly or monthly to save some fees. That way, you will not be much affected with how spike in fees are currently happening these days.

However, I'm still confident to say that bitcoin concept has not changed at all. It's still highly volatile and profitable. Only the transaction fees are not right these days but eventually it will be back to normal as soon as the issue is fixed.

[kentrolla]

If he initially used Bitcoin as an alternative payment, it should have worked, but he only got it as an alternative payment on a dark site at that time. When it was published it was restricted in several countries to protect the country's original currency, but even so, Bitcoin is still said to be successful in attracting many investors into this coin. No matter how public Bitcoin is, it still gets permission as a commodity asset where everyone has the right to use it as an investment tool. I conclude that Bitcoin has not failed, but it has changed its direction for the progress of Bitcoin and is easier to adopt in all countries.

This ain't about the adoptability or illegal/legal purview but rather it's about even more basic or I would say pillars on which Bitcoin was created which is hassle free, not so expensive and without any third person or party involvement which making P2P transfers and it doesn't make sense if this basic and most important aspect while making transfer is exorbitant amount? I don't think anyone making smaller or even mid range transfer would use Bitcoin as payment mode due to charges which would surpass their transfer amount itself. There shouldn't be spike in transfer fee which will eventually be a clot on Bitcoin.

[hatshepsut93]

Bitcoin had fundamental constraints right from the start - you make the blocks too large and the network stops being peer-to-peer, because only large entities would be able to afford a node. So for now we'll stick with Bitcoin-as-digital-gold use cases and wait for someone to come up with a clever scalability solution that doesn't sacrifice any other properties. We could also solve this current fee crisis by patching the client to prevent unintended features like NFTs, but I see very low chance of it actually happening, knowing how conservative Core developers are.

[serjent05]

I do not think that the whole concept of Bitcoin is failing. Bitcoin is not created to make a cheaper transaction fee.  Its purpose is to remove the third-party or any transaction that is relying on trust. See Bitcoin whitepaper, there is in no way that Satoshi stated that Bitcoin is created to minimize transaction fee, instead it says:

Code:

Abstract. A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash would allow online
payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a
financial institution. Digital signatures provide part of the solution, but the main
benefits are lost if a trusted third party is still required to prevent double-spending.
We propose a solution to the double-spending problem using a peer-to-peer network.
The network timestamps transactions by hashing them into an ongoing chain of
hash-based proof-of-work, forming a record that cannot be changed without redoing
the proof-of-work. The longest chain not only serves as proof of the sequence of
events witnessed, but proof that it came from the largest pool of CPU power. As
long as a majority of CPU power is controlled by nodes that are not cooperating to
attack the network, they'll generate the longest chain and outpace attackers. The
network itself requires minimal structure. Messages are broadcast on a best effort
basis, and nodes can leave and rejoin the network at will, accepting the longest
proof-of-work chain as proof of what happened while they were gone.

Code:

12. Conclusion
We have proposed a system for electronic transactions without relying on trust. We started with
the usual framework of coins made from digital signatures, which provides strong control of
ownership, but is incomplete without a way to prevent double-spending. To solve this, we
proposed a peer-to-peer network using proof-of-work to record a public history of transactions
that quickly becomes computationally impractical for an attacker to change if honest nodes
control a majority of CPU power. The network is robust in its unstructured simplicity. Nodes
work all at once with little coordination. They do not need to be identified, since messages are
not routed to any particular place and only need to be delivered on a best effort basis. Nodes can
leave and rejoin the network at will, accepting the proof-of-work chain as proof of what
happened while they were gone. They vote with their CPU power, expressing their acceptance of
valid blocks by working on extending them and rejecting invalid blocks by refusing to work on
them. Any needed rules and incentives can be enforced with this consensus mechanism.

The cheaper transaction fee is just one of the possible good outcome if the third party financial mediator is removed but it is not the main concept of Bitcoin.

Code:

1. Introduction
Commerce on the Internet has come to rely almost exclusively on financial institutions serving as
trusted third parties to process electronic payments. While the system works well enough for
most transactions, it still suffers from the inherent weaknesses of the trust based model.
Completely non-reversible transactions are not really possible, since financial institutions cannot
avoid mediating disputes. The cost of mediation increases transaction costs, limiting the
minimum practical transaction size and cutting off the possibility for small casual transactions,
and there is a broader cost in the loss of ability to make non-reversible payments for nonreversible services. With the possibility of reversal, the need for trust spreads. Merchants must
be wary of their customers, hassling them for more information than they would otherwise need.
A certain percentage of fraud is accepted as unavoidable. These costs and payment uncertainties
can be avoided in person by using physical currency, but no mechanism exists to make payments
over a communications channel without a trusted party.
What is needed is an electronic payment system based on cryptographic proof instead of trust,
allowing any two willing parties to transact directly with each other without the need for a trusted
third party. Transactions that are computationally impractical to reverse would protect sellers
from fraud, and routine escrow mechanisms could easily be implemented to protect buyers. In
this paper, we propose a solution to the double-spending problem using a peer-to-peer distributed
timestamp server to generate computational proof of the chronological order of transactions. The
system is secure as long as honest nodes collectively control more CPU power than any
cooperating group of attacker nodes.

Source: https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

[Jawhead999]

I am assuming that you have read the whitepaper! Then answer my simple question, why and what was the reason Bitcoin was created? Please quote me the page number from the whitepaper, if you reply to my question. Otherwise you would become another troll replying for the sake of quota.

I thought you can answer it by yourself, since it's a simple question. But if you ask me, then let me answer it.

Bitcoin is created to eliminate third party, giving you a choice to hold your own asset and send it without relying on third party, that's. So if there are disadvantages in high transaction fee, waiting for ~10 minutes to be confirmed etc, that can't be the reason Bitcoin is failing, actually Bitcoin was never fall because no hack history and has no chance to get 51% attack.

Abstract. A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash would allow online payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a financial institution. Digital signatures provide part of the solution, but the main benefits are lost if a trusted third party is still required to prevent double-spending. We propose a solution to the double-spending problem using a peer-to-peer network. The network timestamps transactions by hashing them into an ongoing chain of hash-based proof-of-work, forming a record that cannot be changed without redoing the proof-of-work. The longest chain not only serves as proof of the sequence of events witnessed, but proof that it came from the largest pool of CPU power. As long as a majority of CPU power is controlled by nodes that are not cooperating to attack the network, they'll generate the longest chain and outpace attackers. The network itself requires minimal structure. Messages are broadcast on a best effort basis, and nodes can leave and rejoin the network at will, accepting the longest proof-of-work chain as proof of what happened while they were gone.

It was never about cheap fee, it was about fees that were below those that the government charged as at that time Bitcoin was the only payment entity that could get funds from one country to other in a few hours in the cheapest of fee.

Wrong! Bitcoin was not the only one cheapest cryptocurrency to be used for borderless payment, there were many cryptocurrencies exist before 2017.

[Faisal2202]

Where are we going as a Bitcoin community? What do the developer plan for the future? Is this infestation being done by the government? Let's discuss possibilities or we might end up with nothing before the next halving.

You are right and something should be done or this Ordinal problem will eat away the main purpose of BTC for which it was made. I have been against it from day one, and never inscribed a single item on the BTC blockchain yet, the main reason behind this surge in BRC-20 transactions is airdrops. many people who inscribed or minted new BRC-20 tokens made millions of dollars by paying a small amount of fee and now those tokens or NFTs worth a hell lot of money.

I made a few topics on this issue, and how the transaction fee raised to $30+ in no matter of time. I hoped this issue would be resolved soon and to be honest I never expected that it would be running this long and still running. But I have heard in some TG groups and here on BTT also that some groups or maybe a single developer are going to solve this ordinals problem by the end of 2024. As they said when the knot V27 will come in the first or maybe 2nd quarter of 2024.

The ordinal problem will be solved. If that happens then all of the money from BRC-20 tokens will be shift to BTC and the dominance will increase and it is a win-win from all sides for BTC. Now let's see the progress of knot v27

[Franctoshi]

The fees are becoming so worrisome and not making sense anymore with this crazy fees, as it is gradually shifting from what it used to be before, the cheap transactions fees we used to have back days, and I wonder what would be the transaction fees and the kind of network congestion we would experience going further as we haven't even hit the main bull market where we would likely have Bitcoin trading around $100k+ — $250k+ price per Bitcoin. This issue needs to be fixed with urgent attention, else the average Joe wouldn't be able to get their hands on Bitcoin because of its high fees when they think about how much they would spend on fees to get a small amount of BTC and seem it's where we are heading to and if care is not taken.

You can do it bimonthly or monthly to save some fees. That way, you will not be much affected with how spike in fees are currently happening these days.

This is you talking from the investors point of view or perspective, There are people that use Bitcoin for doing business transactions on a daily basis and not only for investment purposes. Here in my country, most of my friends who are into importation business overseas use Bitcoin because of the central bank policy in my country that restricts people to do more than $100 on international transactions per month and for those who are into business you have to pass some difficult processes before the Bank can release bigger amount of dollar for you, and sometimes it can take some weeks to get approved, So In such a situation many have sorted to using Bitcoin in doing their importation business overseas and now the fees are high and at same time facing network congestion, this is the angle from which I'm also pinpointing.

[DooMAD]

But I have heard in some TG groups and here on BTT also that some groups or maybe a single developer are going to solve this ordinals problem by the end of 2024. As they said when the knot V27 will come in the first or maybe 2nd quarter of 2024.

The ordinal problem will be solved. If that happens then all of the money from BRC-20 tokens will be shift to BTC and the dominance will increase and it is a win-win from all sides for BTC. Now let's see the progress of knot v27

All 'Knots' is achieving at the moment is getting itself disconnected from certain pools  (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5478118.msg63333815#msg63333815).  People aren't likely to start using Knots if that situation escalates further.  

And there seems to be some opposition to the idea on GitHub (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/28408), so I wouldn't hold your breath on this being solved any time soon.

It sounds like these people on Telegram and here on the forum need to read more and spread a little less hype.

[Antotena]

Consider the situation we were in 2021 and then considering the present situation we are in, what do you think is the problem? Most of us would say nothing! I would say it is the transaction fees, won't you agree on this part.

What is wrong is wrong in opinion but if the community says it's for the best and they are not complaining, I don't think even the voices of small groups will do something either. The fees doesn't make sense to the common groups of people that transact almost every day but they call it adoption which is fine by me. My bitcoin aren't moving, so I have no problems in what they call this but I know for sure that this will not continue forever, a solution will come if they really want progress for Bitcoin because I don't see bitcoin going far if we are going to pay $30 for each transaction every year.

The whole concept of Bitcoin being the cheapest payment system already got ruined after 2017. Then came a time when institutional investors started buyin Bitcoin and we saw a new ATH. Everything was looking good until these guys, ORDI started utilizing the infrastructure for their own shit agenda.

What has happened now? High transaction fee, congested Bitcoin blockchain and continuous discussion about Ordinals. Cursing the miners and what not!

Where are we going as a Bitcoin community? What do the developer plan for the future? Is this infestation being done by the government? Let's discuss possibilities or we might end up with nothing before the next halving.

I think that's why some developers left for another hard form that happened back then but did that end well, the split was ineffective and wasn't successful but who knows maybe those were only after their on interest.

The ordinals are the next thing in crypto to many people and that sats inscription is doing nothing but increased fees to those using the network, but at the same time, I don't think they will let's that go because if they don't want it to be around, they wouldn't have encourage it in the beginning but it has grown with more than $1 billion market capitalization, will they let that's waste, I don't think so and these fees aren't stopping now but perhaps after the halving.