Fee

[Light]

So Bitcoin is not suitable for micropayments?

It's fine for payments of above something like 10c. Otherwise you'd have a fee that's quite large in proportion to what your sending - however that's to be expected, the network was never designed to handle crap loads of midget payments. In reality I can't think of a reason you'd need to send less than 10c except to gamble but that should be done off-chain to avoid blockchain spam.

[1715463349]

1715463349

[1715463349]

1715463349

[1715463349]

1715463349

[ranlo]

So Bitcoin is not suitable for micropayments?

It's fine for payments of above something like 10c. Otherwise you'd have a fee that's quite large in proportion to what your sending - however that's to be expected, the network was never designed to handle crap loads of midget payments. In reality I can't think of a reason you'd need to send less than 10c except to gamble but that should be done off-chain to avoid blockchain spam.

Pretty much this right here. 10 cents though would come with a fee that (right now) is 5 cents, or 50%. $10 would still be 5 cents. So really it's still a pretty small fee.

[roeylee]

Does it matter if I define a fee of 0.00005 or 0.00001? Would both transactions be treated as "no fee" transactions? 

[ranlo]

Does it matter if I define a fee of 0.00005 or 0.00001? Would both transactions be treated as "no fee" transactions? 

The fee (I forgot what the lowest is, but I know it was changed) would be present, so no, it wouldn't be a no-fee one. It would just be less of a fee.

No fee would literally be 0. For example, you are sending 1 BTC, that's all. Not 1.0000001, but 1.0.

[byt411]

Does it matter if I define a fee of 0.00005 or 0.00001? Would both transactions be treated as "no fee" transactions? 

The fee (I forgot what the lowest is, but I know it was changed) would be present, so no, it wouldn't be a no-fee one. It would just be less of a fee.

No fee would literally be 0. For example, you are sending 1 BTC, that's all. Not 1.0000001, but 1.0.

There is a minimum, but I can't remember either.
OP, I have 2 questions for you:
Are you really that concerned about paying a few cents for a transaction? Don't you realize how high bank and credit card fees are?

[ranlo]

Does it matter if I define a fee of 0.00005 or 0.00001? Would both transactions be treated as "no fee" transactions? 

The fee (I forgot what the lowest is, but I know it was changed) would be present, so no, it wouldn't be a no-fee one. It would just be less of a fee.

No fee would literally be 0. For example, you are sending 1 BTC, that's all. Not 1.0000001, but 1.0.

There is a minimum, but I can't remember either.
OP, I have 2 questions for you:
Are you really that concerned about paying a few cents for a transaction? Don't you realize how high bank and credit card fees are?

A lot of people don't realize the high credit card fees because we don't "pay" them (at least not transparently). Items cost more as a result, but most people aren't aware of that.

[Malin Keshar]

1 - use web wallets, like coinbase, ask the receiver to use too. Think be too paranoid for few cents is not worth.
2 - send many transactions at once
3 - use altcoins. Litecoin fee is 0.001(about one cent). Others altcoins have lesser fees(ex: Doge, typically 1 doge(about 100 satoshis) for transaction).

You are right, BTC is not good for small transactions, and for me is where ALTS have their space. At this point FIAT be worse is no excuse, if we have have even better options around there for such king of transactions

[byt411]

1 - use web wallets, like coinbase, ask the receiver to use too. Think be too paranoid for few cents is not worth.
2 - send many transactions at once
3 - use altcoins. Litecoin fee is 0.001(about one cent). Others altcoins have lesser fees(ex: Doge, typically 1 doge(about 100 satoshis) for transaction).

You are right, BTC is not good for small transactions, and for me is where ALTS have their space. At this point FIAT be worse is no excuse, if we have have even better options around there for such king of transactions

If you bundle up transactions, fees will be higher.

[Malin Keshar]

1 - use web wallets, like coinbase, ask the receiver to use too. Think be too paranoid for few cents is not worth.
2 - send many transactions at once
3 - use altcoins. Litecoin fee is 0.001(about one cent). Others altcoins have lesser fees(ex: Doge, typically 1 doge(about 100 satoshis) for transaction).

You are right, BTC is not good for small transactions, and for me is where ALTS have their space. At this point FIAT be worse is no excuse, if we have have even better options around there for such king of transactions

If you bundle up transactions, fees will be higher.

i, say, I send 100 0.001 outputs via separate transactions will be the fee higher than send all 100 outputs at once?

For my experience won't be, people with automated systems do that(ex: Ritz, Primedice, that guy that pays you for playing minecraft, etc...).

Of course that send 100 transactions still will be more expensive than send one, no matter if you group them or not.

[xXBEVOXx]

What Android app allows no fee transactions?
Is it risky? 

Pay the miner 5 cents or wait days for your transaction to process.

Ive seen some transactions without a miner fee take several months to process. Trust me it is worth the $0.05 to get a conformation quickly.

[ranlo]

1 - use web wallets, like coinbase, ask the receiver to use too. Think be too paranoid for few cents is not worth.
2 - send many transactions at once
3 - use altcoins. Litecoin fee is 0.001(about one cent). Others altcoins have lesser fees(ex: Doge, typically 1 doge(about 100 satoshis) for transaction).

You are right, BTC is not good for small transactions, and for me is where ALTS have their space. At this point FIAT be worse is no excuse, if we have have even better options around there for such king of transactions

If you bundle up transactions, fees will be higher.

The fees only go up because the transaction size does. I think it's around 1 input and like 7-8 outputs per KB or so (don't quote me on that though). So you could:

1) Send 8 people each 0.001 BTC separately and pay 0.0008 BTC in fees (8x0.0001)
2) Send 8 people each 0.001 BTC in one bundle and pay 0.0001 BTC in fees (1x0.0001)

The reason why the pools and such pay bigger fees is because they have tons of outputs, each increasing the size of the transaction. In the above scenario, for the same 0.0008 BTC you spent sending 8 people their own, you could have done 8*8 or 64 people in bundles of 8.

[BunsenBurner]

So Bitcoin is not suitable for micropayments?

Bitcoin IS suitable for micropayments. But if you mean micropayments as in a tenth of a cent, then no, since no one needs that.
If you pay 1 US Dollar to someone in Australia, he/she would receive like $0.60. If you use Bitcoin, he/she receives $0.96. Electronic Fiat is even worse for micropayments.

If you are trying to make micropayments as small as a few cent, you shouldn't use bitcoin, at least not on-chain tx.

[roeylee]

If you are trying to make micropayments as small as a few cent, you shouldn't use bitcoin, at least not on-chain tx.

What is "not on-chain tx"?

[BunsenBurner]

If you are trying to make micropayments as small as a few cent, you shouldn't use bitcoin, at least not on-chain tx.

What is "not on-chain tx"?

The easiest way is to use coinbase (and ask the receivers to use coinbase as well).
For the details, you can take a look at the page.
http://blog.coinbase.com/post/57483182558/you-can-now-send-micro-transactions-with-zero-fees

[shorena]

If you are trying to make micropayments as small as a few cent, you shouldn't use bitcoin, at least not on-chain tx.

What is "not on-chain tx"?

A TX is considered "not on chain" or "off chain" when its just internal. If you have an account with company X and they hold 3 BTC for you. I have one there as well and want to send you 2 BTC they can just change the BTC in my account by -2 and yours by +2. Just by changing an internal spreadsheet or database. If you now want to transfer 5 BTC from.company X to your private wallet there must be an "on chain" (as in stored on the blockchain) TX.

[roeylee]

Off chain is meaning  "Web wallet". Right? And that has its own risk.

[BunsenBurner]

Off chain is meaning  "Web wallet". Right?

Not really. Indeed, shorena has given you a very good explanation, but let me try again.

Say, if Alice and Bob both have an account on Coinbase, and Alice want to send Bob 1 BTC.
Alice could do so with a open transaction (just like every other transaction you see in the blockchain).
Or, Alice could do a off-chain transaction on Coinbase (Alice's account balance decreases by 1 BTC, Bob's account balance increases by 1 BTC, no actual bitcoin transaction is created, and the whole transaction can be done instantly and internally within Coinbase system).

[Light]

Pretty much this right here. 10 cents though would come with a fee that (right now) is 5 cents, or 50%. $10 would still be 5 cents. So really it's still a pretty small fee.

Just out of reference, with the newest implementation fees should drop to 0.5c so it basically means that txs are pretty damn cheap.

Off chain is meaning  "Web wallet". Right? And that has its own risk.

In a sense it is a web wallet. Anyone who has control over a private key with Bitcoin associated with the public address are in control over those coins as well so unless you have the private key there is also a risk someone will steal those coins. You won't be able to avoid off-chain transactions (pretty common for gambling) but you can minimise the amount you have there (ie don't put everything you on onto JD).

[roeylee]

Just out of reference, with the newest implementation fees should drop to 0.5c so it basically means that txs are pretty damn cheap.

Please explain

[ranlo]

Pretty much this right here. 10 cents though would come with a fee that (right now) is 5 cents, or 50%. $10 would still be 5 cents. So really it's still a pretty small fee.

Just out of reference, with the newest implementation fees should drop to 0.5c so it basically means that txs are pretty damn cheap.

In theory, you're correct. The problem is that a lot of the miners and pools are still using older versions of the Bitcoin client. There was a thread about this, saying that like 70% of them still haven't upgraded in like a year or so and so are far behind as it is. On top of this, the miners/pools can apparently set their own requirements for fees and decline transactions that don't match what they want.