No matter how much we love BTC, confirmations take way too long!

[fonsie]

Start watching at 17:50
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2q9pItnO0U

They also mention that altcoins are highley insecure.

[V8x8d]

This point will be nonsense when bank bail-ins are triggered and people are locked out of their bank accounts for days or weeks waiting to see what remains. I purchased Bitcoin as a hedge against Fiat (Gold/Silver are the best store of wealth, however are not liquid enough). If 100% of my online purchases in the future are made via Bitcoin then I care not about how I pay for my groceries/petrol. At this point the network will be secure and Bitcoin will be a store of wealth and I no longer need to worry about counterparty risk.

[TheChosenOne]

Payment processors are the answer my mate.
You can also work with 'approved' addresses or something like that where a merchant trusts an address that has succesfully been used before.

[greenearplugs]

i've been in many discussions on this exact topic and have yet to here a good response.  Even peter todd's double spending could be prevented with a simple smart wallet that checks for and flags any transactions that don't come from "vanilla" sources.  If there is anything even remotely suspicious, then the transaction is flagged, and the customer is not allowed to leave the store with the product.

Anyone with more technical knowledge care to refute satoshi here?

So what happened to Satoshis theory As this person stated?



Satoshi's comment PASTED IN HERE  VV  
*********************
I believe it'll be possible for a payment processing company to provide as a service the rapid distribution of transactions with good-enough checking in something like 10 seconds or less.

The network nodes only accept the first version of a transaction they receive to incorporate into the block they're trying to generate.  When you broadcast a transaction, if someone else broadcasts a double-spend at the same time, it's a race to propagate to the most nodes first.  If one has a slight head start, it'll geometrically spread through the network faster and get most of the nodes.

A rough back-of-the-envelope example:
1         0
4         1
16        4
64        16
80%      20%

So if a double-spend has to wait even a second, it has a huge disadvantage.

The payment processor has connections with many nodes.  When it gets a transaction, it blasts it out, and at the same time monitors the network for double-spends.  If it receives a double-spend on any of its many listening nodes, then it alerts that the transaction is bad.  A double-spent transaction wouldn't get very far without one of the listeners hearing it.  The double-spender would have to wait until the listening phase is over, but by then, the payment processor's broadcast has reached most nodes, or is so far ahead in propagating that the double-spender has no hope of grabbing a significant percentage of the remaining nodes.
 **********************************


Or is this what payment processors do already and we are talking about something quicker here?

Just curious has anyone looked at the other coins, and why are some stating HIGH security even more than BTC or same + MUCH faster transaction times... I just don't get it, cant we just implement the same thing? Many test coins around.

[ensurance982]

I have yet to see or hear of a merchant that doesn't require a minimum of at least 1 confirmation.    In theory,  it might not be needed,  at least if there is a sufficient transaction fee  to prioritize it.

However,  I believe  the merchants/processors are all practicing CYA / "better safe than sorry,"  and  requiring a minimum of   1 confirm,  for even the smallest transaction,  and  larger transactions/operaations generally requiring 4 or more confirms.

Are you kidding? For example here in Arnhem, there are plenty of places that accept Bitcoin, and *none* of them requires waiting for any confirmations.

Doesn't matter whether you pay for a cup of coffee, or hundreds of euros for a family dinner in a restaurant. Instant payment, NO confirmations needed whatsoever. That's the ones accepting Bitcoin directly, as well as the ones using a payment provider.

So far, thousands of euros worth of bitcoins has been spent, and exactly ZERO cents have been at risk / charged back / double spent.

Yeah, it just doesn't make sense to scam someone for a more few dollars or euros! You'd really have to control a lot of hashing power to perform such a double spend effectively. If the transaction has spread and most of the nodes accepted the 'real' transaction, you're most likely fine!

[Kazimir]

Yeah, it just doesn't make sense to scam someone for a more few dollars or euros!

You probably understand this, but just to emphasize for all those people who are still skeptical: it doesn't just not make sense, it's impossible. At least not without spending many, many thousands of dollars worth of resources, and then still only have a limited chance of success.

A merchant can accept Bitcoin zero-confirmation payments not just because his customers are such nice people that they won't scam him for a few bucks (or a few hunderd bucks). He can accept Bitcoin zero-confirmation payments because of how Bitcoin works.

Again, there's a lot of theoretical debate around this (I know Peter Todd mentioned a few tricks) but in daily practice, this is what it boils down to. Bitcoin works absolutely fine in point of sale situations.

[Sitarow]

Payment processors are the answer my mate.
You can also work with 'approved' addresses or something like that where a merchant trusts an address that has succesfully been used before.

It has been discussed over the years. Indeed what you state is the next step service providers can monopolies on.

However as Litecoin is another network that is used for payment at merchants and with the advent of scrypt asics that network will show more promise for fast stable transactions.

[ensurance982]

Yeah, it just doesn't make sense to scam someone for a more few dollars or euros!

You probably understand this, but just to emphasize for all those people who are still skeptical: it doesn't just not make sense, it's impossible. At least not without spending many, many thousands of dollars worth of resources, and then still only have a limited chance of success.

A merchant can accept Bitcoin zero-confirmation payments not just because his customers are such nice people that they won't scam him for a few bucks (or a few hunderd bucks). He can accept Bitcoin zero-confirmation payments because of how Bitcoin works.

Again, there's a lot of theoretical debate around this (I know Peter Todd mentioned a few tricks) but in daily practice, this is what it boils down to. Bitcoin works absolutely fine in point of sale situations.

Actually, if the merchant is running a simple BitcoinQT-like terminal you could try to connect to it with your Bitcoin node. Then you issue a transaction that pays for your coffee. But at the same time (or with a slight delay, some people wrote a paper) you issue a transaction to all other nodes (and mining pools) that spends the same Bitcoin (inputs), that paid for your coffee, to an address you control. Now the merchant thinks you paid for your coffee, but in reality it's the transaction that transferred the BTC to your own account, that gets confirmed and included in the Blockchain.
But there are ways of working around this. You have to simply look for transactions that are doing exactly this and don't accept them.

[bitsmichel]

Payment processors are the answer my mate.
You can also work with 'approved' addresses or something like that where a merchant trusts an address that has succesfully been used before.

It has been discussed over the years. Indeed what you state is the next step service providers can monopolies on.

However as Litecoin is another network that is used for payment at merchants and with the advent of scrypt asics that network will show more promise for fast stable transactions.

Bitcoin transactions are extremely fast, if you consider the slow banking system. The litecoin network may be faster, but it doesn't have such a large user base.

[tss]

who can send $1B across the world and have it be FINAL in a few hours? 

huh?

who?

how?

i'm listening?

i would really like to know.

ohh wait.. BITCOIN!

you were never meant to buy groceries with btc or your favorite red bull.  stop posting the same thing every week! 

[Harley997]

Having to wait to spend your BTC is annoying, I agree. Although it's less than a hour I can get my brother to transfer me as much as I wanted and have the money in there in a matter of seconds (UK has instant bank transfers) The one reason why I still chose BTC though is because I cut out EVERYTHING to do with banks, I cannot tell you enough how much I hate banks they have took so much money from me over the years I would prefer to take my money put it on a USB, fly half way across the world and still use the same currency rather go through the hassle of exchanging it, then paying fees for exchanging, them paying fees and effort to exchange it back to main currency you had, I find it really annoying, as someone who has travelled over 50-100 times and into 30 countries I hate thinking exchanging, how much X with worth in Y etc.

EDIT: Also the guy above me, I cannot agree more with you, you tell me who can send $1b across the other side of the world for and have it finalized in less than a hour and pay close to nothing fees!!

[qiuxiang]

who can send $1B across the world and have it be FINAL in a few hours? 

huh?

who?

how?

i'm listening?

i would really like to know.

ohh wait.. BITCOIN!

you were never meant to buy groceries with btc or your favorite red bull.  stop posting the same thing every week! 

Bitcoin is convenient for international wire.
However, bitcoin is used more as a payment approach, and in this case, tens of minutes is too long, think about you want to buy something and you have to wait tens of minutes for the payment to go through.

[doubleredrolex]

You just wait the 10 seconds for it to show up on the block chain and you are good. Don't forget that i can go buy something with my visa and call the bank 2 days later and reverse the transaction saying my card was stolen or whatever. There is no need for the merchant to make you wait around for 40 min for 3 or 4 confirmations unless you are buying something big like a $50,000 car or something. They could always ask for your ID for larger transactions if they don't trust you. The buyer can't reverse it anyways after they hit send on their cell phone. Once it hits block chain.info then you are probably ok. If i was buying 100 BTC from someone for cash, then i might make them wait around for a couple confirmations just in case... haha.

[Razick]

Not an original topic, but there is a reason why it keeps coming up.
No matter how much we love BTC, confirmations take way too long!

<Insert standard response>
"Transactions are instant, and full confirmation is usually done in under 1 hour... both of which are better than credit cards."

<Reality check>
Merchants complete your sale 'almost instantly' with credit cards, and sometimes make you wait almost an hour when paying with BTC, which really does not work well in the real world....  better point of sale options are needed ASAP.

I agree. It would be nice to speed things up, but even if we don't, it's still great for internet purchases.

[BittBurger]

Agree with topic.   Unfortunately no solutions on the horizon.   Wahhh!

[bitkilo]

Purchased a drink the other day and guy told me i would have to wait for min 4 confirmations before i could drink it, lol
I paid in fiat and drank up

[Gleb Gamow]

I'm just gonna leave this here: https://blockchain.info/

[Yuuto]

Not an original topic, but there is a reason why it keeps coming up.
No matter how much we love BTC, confirmations take way too long!

<Insert standard response>
"Transactions are instant, and full confirmation is usually done in under 1 hour... both of which are better than credit cards."

<Reality check>
Merchants complete your sale 'almost instantly' with credit cards, and sometimes make you wait almost an hour when paying with BTC, which really does not work well in the real world....  better point of sale options are needed ASAP.

That is true.

If you were just buying a coffee from a merchant, and you're paying bitcoins to him, he would need to wait for 1 confirmation unless you are a long term customer which the merchant trusts. So it sort of defeats the purpose of bitcoin in the first place. By the time you get a confirmation you probably are late for work.

Especially when if you pay 0.0001 fee it isn't enough for first block confirmations anymore. That used to be the case, now you have to pay more like 0.0004 per transaction to get it through quick, which with the soaring bitcoin price isn't that good.

[Tribizz]

I agree
It took me 30 minutes to confirm a transaction

[Heyo:P]

Not an original topic, but there is a reason why it keeps coming up.
No matter how much we love BTC, confirmations take way too long!

<Insert standard response>
"Transactions are instant, and full confirmation is usually done in under 1 hour... both of which are better than credit cards."

<Reality check>
Merchants complete your sale 'almost instantly' with credit cards, and sometimes make you wait almost an hour when paying with BTC, which really does not work well in the real world....  better point of sale options are needed ASAP.

Yes, very much so yes!

Perhaps if the community could agree on Segwit or BTU things would speed up, but for now transactions are so unbelievably slow (even when you're paying .5$ transaction fees). I really do think something should be done, I'm just not sure what.