Revision of High transaction fee in bitcoin.

[Nangiconference]

We know that Crypto transaction fees are paid when you do an action on a blockchain.
The fees prevent blockchain networks from being flooded with transactions and  to prevent legitimate usage of networks.
The reason behind the transaction fee could not be limited to;
1. Faster confirmation time: Bitcoin transactions are processed by miners, who prioritize transactions with higher fees. We know that every business oriented person is after profit and the highest bidder is welcome first. As we look forward in promoting and spreading the usage and acceptance of bitcoin, this fee should be reviewed.

2. Network congestion: During times of high demand on the Bitcoin network, there may be a backlog of unconfirmed transactions. The fee will discourage many from using the network so as to decongest the server.
There should be alternatives to these motives for general adoption.

I researched that on a Monday (one day), the total value of all transaction fees paid to miners hit an astronomical sum above $11 million on that one day, according to Blockchain.com data.

If this issue is been addressed, bitcoin will prevail. The fee is deterring the adoption especially in our rural and local areas.
This transaction fee may stand as an obstacle and a repugnance to the widespread of bitcoin acceptance.

[1714638641]

1714638641

[1714638641]

1714638641

[1714638641]

1714638641

[1714638641]

1714638641

[Jawhead999]

There should be alternatives to these motives for general adoption.

Lightning network, Liquid Network, Rootstock etc.

If this issue is been addressed, bitcoin will prevail. The fee is deterring the adoption especially in our rural and local areas.
This transaction fee may stand as an obstacle and a repugnance to the widespread of bitcoin acceptance.

They can start as small as possible, just buy Bitcoin in centralized exchange, you will not pay transactions fees as you only pay the trading fees. Yeah I know it's bad to hold your money in CEX since it prone to many issues including bankruptcy.

But that's the only way for small holder.

[_act_]

They can start as small as possible, just buy Bitcoin in centralized exchange, you will not pay transactions fees as you only pay the trading fees. Yeah I know it's bad to hold your money in CEX since it prone to many issues including bankruptcy.

But that's the only way for small holder.

Small holders can use lightning network. You can get those lightning network apps that already set up a channel for you. There are many of them that have good reputation. You do not have to use one of them, you can use three or more of them. Exchanges have total control of your coins and the exchange can be hacked. Also the exchange wallet may be under maintenance and in a way you will not be able to use your coin when you supposed to use it.

[Kruw]

This transaction fee may stand as an obstacle and a repugnance to the widespread of bitcoin acceptance.

Transaction fees are an expected and welcome attribute, they incentivize miners to secure the network.  Satoshi noted this in the Bitcoin whitepaper:

Once a predetermined number of coins have entered circulation, the incentive can transition entirely to transaction fees and be completely inflation free.

[Husires]

It is true that Bitcoin fees are considered a problem for adoption, but it is a problem that has solutions and has been discussed a lot. If your transactions are rare and for large amounts, wait until the fees are reasonable and then broadcast your transactions. However, if you use Bitcoin on an almost daily basis, use the Lightning Network.
If you have not already opened your channel, use https://phoenix.acinq.co/

[pooya87]

If this issue is been addressed, bitcoin will prevail. The fee is deterring the adoption especially in our rural and local areas.
This transaction fee may stand as an obstacle and a repugnance to the widespread of bitcoin acceptance.

Unfortunately this is one of those issues that polarized the community. There still are a small group of people who refuse to accept that what's known as Ordinals is an attack on Bitcoin, which is why the progress on fixing the exploit this attack is abusing has been very slow and fruitless.

It is going too far to talk about bitcoin prevailing or not, just because of this attack. But you are right that this is affecting the adoption negatively.

[Z-tight]

We know that Crypto transaction fees are paid when you do an action on a blockchain.
The fees prevent blockchain networks from being flooded with transactions and  to prevent legitimate usage of networks.

BTC tx fees are paid to the miners for confirming your tx and as incentive to them for using their computational power to keep the BTC network secure. Tx fees are not designed to prevent the network from being congested, what it does is help miners to prioritize tx's and to also earn from mining.

This transaction fee may stand as an obstacle and a repugnance to the widespread of bitcoin acceptance.

High tx fee is surely a problem and it makes BTC unusable, especially as a currency, but i think it is a temporary problem. We used to make tx's with 1 sat/vByte before and i think we will see those times again, though i do not know when.

[Cookdata]

I researched that on a Monday (one day), the total value of all transaction fees paid to miners hit an astronomical sum above $11 million on that one day, according to Blockchain.com data.

If this issue is been addressed, bitcoin will prevail. The fee is deterring the adoption especially in our rural and local areas.
This transaction fee may stand as an obstacle and a repugnance to the widespread of bitcoin acceptance.

I have been watching the bitcoin network since past 2 weeks and I have noticed a little decline in the mempool, it has not excwd more than 300k pending transaction since 2 weeks now, this could be because the mempool aren't congested with ordinals, I don't know if this is temporary or permanent but for now, it seems the hype around BRC20 tokens has cool off the crazy fees has stop.

Short term, miners has recovered from their losses and many of them sold plenty of their Bitcoin stash above $45k but long term, they will have to endure for another time to see this profits again because in less than 2 months time, the rewards will be halve the original amount they are earning right now and if you should put the cost of operation into account, many of them will close their mining rig as it wouldn't be profitable to mine.

You are the first to raise concern the congestion of the network neither am I going to be the last to reply, it's left for the community to speak on that, you can see that almost everyone are paying huge amount to be included in the next block, when nobody pays these fees, I don't think the fees will even will even go up but they are ready to pay them and as long as the keep paying, miners will do their job and comfirm the ones they can.
Miners could also be looking at the future incentive of transactions when the block reward are no longer enough to settle them, it wouldn't make sense now if rewards are tiny and then later they somehow make people to fight for transaction fees if block of transactions are limited in the future again.

[Die_empty]

If this issue is been addressed, bitcoin will prevail. The fee is deterring the adoption especially in our rural and local areas.
This transaction fee may stand as an obstacle and a repugnance to the widespread of bitcoin acceptance.

Unfortunately this is one of those issues that polarized the community. There still are a small group of people who refuse to accept that what's known as Ordinals is an attack on Bitcoin, which is why the progress on fixing the exploit this attack is abusing has been very slow and fruitless.

It is going too far to talk about bitcoin prevailing or not, just because of this attack. But you are right that this is affecting the adoption negatively.

These people are making money from these inscriptions so they don't see it as an attack but as an opportunity. It might benefit a few people but it is hurting more Bitcoin users. It was very easy to advise people to try using Bitcoin payment because the tx fees were cheaper than some bank charges. I see it as an attack on the Bitcoin ecosystem because one of the outstanding benefits of using Bitcoin use to low transaction fees but this is not the case again. However, it will take people who look beyond financial gain to come together and repel this attack.
   

High tx fee is surely a problem and it makes BTC unusable, especially as a currency, but i think it is a temporary problem. We used to make tx's with 1 sat/vByte before and i think we will see those times again, though i do not know when.

This problem might still reoccur except something is done to stop these inscriptions. It might be a temporal problem but I don't see it ending soon except it is fixed.

[Frankolala]

High tx fee is surely a problem and it makes BTC unusable, especially as a currency, but i think it is a temporary problem. We used to make tx's with 1 sat/vByte before and i think we will see those times again, though i do not know when.

This problem might still reoccur except something is done to stop these inscriptions. It might be a temporal problem but I don't see it ending soon except it is fixed.

Yea, that is what I am worried about, because if something is not done to stop these inscription so that we don't see this reoccurring again in the future, and who knows maybe in the future the fee will be discouraging.

This is why your transaction output should not be less than $500, so that in future when such high transaction fee comes up, it wouldn't be a problem for you to transfer your bitcoin. But if you have $50 that you sent to your wallet, often to make up $500. You might end up spending a very high amount for transaction fee when you want to withdraw all the $500 in one transaction.

[Antotena]

Yea, that is what I am worried about, because if something is not done to stop these inscription so that we don't see this reoccurring again in the future, and who knows maybe in the future the fee will be discouraging.

They can reoccurre in the future but it wouldn't be more than what he have seen because for the very first time, mempool becomes congested with over 300,000 unconfirmed transaction, even when we had bitcoin halving, we didn't have much unconfirmed transaction like that in the past. Experts believe that it's a coordinated attack by the guys that want these ordinals and now that it's fading out with time, they might even be forgotten just like other useless trends in the past.

This is why your transaction output should not be less than $500, so that in future when such high transaction fee comes up, it wouldn't be a problem for you to transfer your bitcoin. But if you have $50 that you sent to your wallet, often to make up $500. You might end up spending a very high amount for transaction fee when you want to withdraw all the $500 in one transaction.

This is not accurate, you can have $50 in your wallet and be able to pay a little amount especially when you have a single input, a receiving wallet address of segwit format, if it were a wallet address like legacy, you will be paying more if you want to send a transaction in bitcoin network. You can still customize your fees and choose low sats/vbytes for your transaction.

[franky1]

You can still customize your fees and choose low sats/vbytes for your transaction.

not when the base cheap fee is non zero, but something that averages above 20sat/byte fee as a minimum

It is true that Bitcoin fees are considered a problem for adoption, but it is a problem that has solutions and has been discussed a lot.

the advert you promote has been widely known to have bugs, flaws and unfinished features that do not meet its promises. it relies on middlemen taking fee's per payments and each payment is not a single fee from the wallet you use, but a chain of payments per router involved in the hops to destination..
the promotion you advertise is not a solution that everyone should be swayed over to use, nor coerced or forced due to the annoyances created on the bitcoin network. the real solution is to close the softened exploits of the bitcoin network and reduce the fee bumps and other mechanisms that cause fee rises. and change code to make lean transactions more preferred not bloated transactions

[pinggoki]

Unfortunately this is one of those issues that polarized the community. There still are a small group of people who refuse to accept that what's known as Ordinals is an attack on Bitcoin, which is why the progress on fixing the exploit this attack is abusing has been very slow and fruitless.

It is going too far to talk about bitcoin prevailing or not, just because of this attack. But you are right that this is affecting the adoption negatively.

The small group that you're talking about are people that are benefiting from all this problem with ordinals and high transaction fees, most likely they're miners and NFT people that don't have anything better to do besides leaving garbage on the network. I don't believe that it's because of this groups refusal that are causing the slow fix for this vulnerability, it's more likely that the devs can do it but they choose not to because they're probably somehow benefiting from this too because the vulnerability is already identified right? So how come they're not fixing it quickly? They probably got a long time already to fix it so what's the hold up right? I do think it affects the adoption negatively but for me, I don't think it's that big of a deal, ordinals are just like an NFT anyway, they'll eventually lose their hype and people will find new ways to get others into crypto.

[adaseb]

Most people since 2017 pretty much have learned that you cannot use the bitcoin main chain for small transactions. You can’t use it to pay for your coffee or to send a $5 to your buddy. We all moved on to ETH L2 networks or other alt coins.

The fees now are better than before. Last I checked you could get a 25sat/btye fee going, which isn’t too bad if you are sending more than 4 figures but if you are sending 2 figures or less then it doesn’t make sense. Hence why many are moving to lightning or other alternative bitcoin networks.

[Kakmakr]

Miner fees are crucial to Bitcoin's future, because it will have to replace the block reward for miners to mine in the future.

The "Halving" will eventually reduce the block reward so much, that it will not be enough to motivate miners to process the transactions.

Yes, the fees are high at this moment, but we know things like  Ordinals are causing congestion on the Blockchain and that congestion, require people to pay higher fees to get their transactions confirmed.

The fast and cheap alternative are the Lightning network for smaller transactions.   (If more people use that, congestion will be reduced)

[avikz]

This transaction fee may stand as an obstacle and a repugnance to the widespread of bitcoin acceptance.

Transaction fees are an expected and welcome attribute, they incentivize miners to secure the network.  Satoshi noted this in the Bitcoin whitepaper:

Once a predetermined number of coins have entered circulation, the incentive can transition entirely to transaction fees and be completely inflation free.

Yes, transaction fees are expected. But that has to be reasonable and madness free. Especially when we see too many optimistic comments stating that Bitcoin will one day replace the traditional banking system. But in reality, Bitcoin is a stone age payment method if we compare it with the traditional banking system. It is expensive and slow. Along with the Ordinals madness, it has become highly expensive and slower. Do you really support this?

I surely do not! In order for Bitcoin to become competitive, the madness with translation fees need to be addressed. Otherwise, Bitcoin will remain as an invest only! I am sure no one will like that to remain as an investment only.

[davis196]

If this issue is been addressed, bitcoin will prevail. The fee is deterring the adoption especially in our rural and local areas.
This transaction fee may stand as an obstacle and a repugnance to the widespread of bitcoin acceptance.

Why does it stop the adoption in rural and local areas? You have to pay the transaction fee regardless where you live. The fee is the same if you live in a big city or a small village. I guess you mean that the people living in rural areas are poor, so they can't afford big transaction fees. I've written this many times, if you don't like high BTC transaction fees, just choose an altcoin or stick to fiat money. Nobody is forcing you to use BTC. Buying and HODLing BTC doesn't require making multiple transactions and paying high transaction fees.
And by the way, the transaction fees on the Bitcoin blockchain are pretty normal right now.

[ifarted]

Transaction fees doesn't prevent the mempool getting flooded because it is the reason why some transactions aren't getting confirmed because the transaction fee increased and the minimum or optimal transaction fee are the ones that are most likely getting confirmed. If you check the mempool right now, you can see the transaction with lowest fee are stuck and waiting for the transaction fee to decrease.

[pooya87]

Miner fees are crucial to Bitcoin's future, because it will have to replace the block reward for miners to mine in the future.

I highlighted the keywords, in other words using block subsidy reduction argument now that it is not an issue and won't be in the near future is irrelevant under the context of a spam attack like Ordinals.

The fast and cheap alternative are the Lightning network for smaller transactions.  (If more people use that, congestion will be reduced)

No it won't because the fees haven't gone up because more people are using bitcoin.
Instead the fees went up because some people are abusing the protocol and are spamming the chain which means even if every single bitcoin user stopped using bitcoin, the fee would still be high thanks to these malicious spammers.

[EarnOnVictor]

-snip-
I researched that on a Monday (one day), the total value of all transaction fees paid to miners hit an astronomical sum above $11 million on that one day, according to Blockchain.com data.

In my opinion, miners have been exploitative as far as Bitcoin is concerned, the income does not flow anywhere but to them only which makes it very bad and ill-planned. This can only happen in a decentralised system where no one can do anything unless to follow such a process already structured. This is ugly to me and whenever I think about it, it is so annoying as Bitcoin encourages a monopolistic system, which I know that Satoshi didn't plan well, and had it been he didn't leave everything like he did, he would have resolved it justifiably.

$11M in just a day? That is so huge, and that means that within a few months, they would have each pocketed hundreds of millions of dollars and this is unchallenged because the system has already favoured them unless the whole overhauling will happen which I know sooner or later this will happen. To make matters worse, these miners don't care about Bitcoin itself but the business they make around it, if not, they would have voted for developers to do something about the high fees associated with it. For now, it is business as usual, so let us fold our arms and watch as our hands are tied on this no matter how pissed we are.