Topic: Babylon Staking Sparks Bitcoin Fee Surge: Transfers Hit $105 Before Plummeting (Read 279 times)

The thing is why would I spend 100x+ in transaction when I can just wait and pay it normally?  As long as the transaction is not urgent, I would love to take my time waiting for the lowest transaction fee.  You can call me cheap but that won't take away the fact that I have saved 100 dollars plus in my transaction fee.

I have some belief that might not be true but wanted to share it anyway, I observed that every time there is an event that includes BTC transfers that can possibly congest the network, there is someone who always manipulates the transaction fee by sending higher fee to kickstart the fee competition. And the current event @OP is talking is one of them.  See how the fee started to normalize after the heat of the event calmed down?

Miners are not the only subsystem in the Bitcoin system. You have to consider other people who use the network, and some businesses that use it for transactions. So you expect them to pay a high transaction fee because you want to support miners. Will you buy gas at a high price because you want to support gas-producing nations? Regarding timing transactions, that's the new normal and there is nothing wrong with doing it. If you know you can pay fewer fees in a few days, why would you pay high if it is not urgent? 

You just said he should have used Bitcoin because it is POW and he mentioned that LTC is proof of work. Is there any rule that says Bitcoiners should use only Bitcoin for transactions? Because I support petrol cars, I shouldn't use cheap electric trains for transportation. I support Bitcoin but it wouldn't stop me from using altcoins.   

Er, ok, I remember when it was possible to opt for a 0-sat fee to send bitcoin, and I also remember when it was hundreds of dollars to even approve individual contracts for Ethereum, never mind actually send any Ether. Today, right now, Bitcoin is far cheaper to send than Ether. But that's not really the point, is it? No-context memory of how fees used to be in comparison to what they are now is only fun for a moment...

We're always stuck on dollar price, when I can tell you Ethereum holders would prefer to be above their old ATH (like Bitcoin is now) and pay much more dollars in fees.

Usually in specific types of spam attack the fee spike takes place like this. These are spam attacks designed to artificially inflate the fee rates. This is why they don't last that long either. The spammers are the ones who keep paying outrageously higher fees and the moment they stop, fees come down. That's because regular users aren't exactly willing to pay 1000+ sat/vb fees...

Or create the TX now without very high fee, if you don't need quick confirmation.


Some people actually paid attention, but realize it's not feasible. For example, why should someone pay 1% of total input amount when they only send small amount to someone else where the rest is sent to change address?

that must have been a LONG time ago  we've moved on into an age where the purpose of cryptocurrency is not to make sending money cheaper. i'm not sure what it's purpose is though if not that.

Yeah the days of 5 cents transaction fees are almost for every gone. Fortunately I don't send many transactions these days so I'm not affected by these sudden spikes in fees. Just HODL.

i had proposed having a 2-tier fee structure in the past but no one really paid attention to it. all transactions would need 2 fee outputs. one for a fixed percentage transaction fee (such as 1% of the total amount of the inputs) and one for the fee market. while that doesn't solve fee spikes what it does do is contribute to miners bottom line and fixes a loophole where large transactions (in satoshis) get a free ride off of everyone. if you're rich you shouldn't mind paying 1% fee. and if you're poor then 1% is not a huge amount. but in both cases, miners benefit.

definitely not but we need to be figuring out how to keep miners having an income when the block rewards become insignificant. so having 2 separate fees as i mentioned above could help with that. it also slows down people doing frivolous transactions since now they have two fees to contend with.

Yes the fee have gone back to normal. High fees would have helped miners especially those from a country where the electricity bill isn't cheap or doesn't have other source of electricity that is cheap or people who doesn't have lots of money can afford although it is a bad situation for those who regularly use bitcoin especially those who only have small amount of btc would only exhaust their funds just for the fees alone and have nothing left for them.

Thankfully the fees is now back to somewhat normal. It's ow 6 Sat/vB. But such kind of statements can be suicidal for Bitcoin itself. While miners will be very happy if they receive high fees, it effectively discourages people from using Bitcoin as a payment processor. In reality, a common bitcoin users will never want to pay such a ridiculous transaction fees. They would rather use fiat or any other cryptocurrency. The market is very competitive. 

Bitcoin network really needs an overhaul to solve these old problems. You definitely wouldn't want Bitcoin to be placed in museums for display only where no one wants to spend it due to ridiculously high fees. 

you got lucky this time but maybe the next time it could last for longer.


i would expect that ethereum's transaction fees will become lower as time goes on, which is the opposite that i expect of bitcoin. so there's that. i remember when it was possible to send eth for $0.01. bitcoin was way more expensive.

OK, i didn't even know this happened, coming across this thread now made me to rush down to mempool.space to see what the situation looks like currently, and behold, we are back to 4 satoshi per virtual byte.

And let me point out that I love the sacarm in the last part if your post 😁, but that wasn't really needed you know, it's not bitcoin's fault that it's a proof of work, and beside, every crypto currency blockchain protocol mustn't be the same, you talk about bitcoin being proof of work leading to high transactions fees at time, what about ethereum that is proof of stake and yet, it's transfer fees have never been less than $5 since it switched from pow to pos?.. 🤔

ok but what happens if say after another few halvings, bitcoin is still at the same price or even lower price? do you think your transaction fee should be more than it is today? and would you be willing to pay it? you don't seem like you would. you're only willing to "support" the network when fees are low but when they get high, you want to bail out and use something else

honestly it seems like such a hassle to use bitcoin on a daily basis. to an outside observer they must think some of you guys are crazy. just send your money and be done with it. but you spend time strategizing about how you can set a low fee and do research about what the current fee is and try and set yours accordingly meanwhile other people have much better things to do with their time. like earning money. the time you waste trying to save a few dollars is probably not worth it.

Except for block 858115^[1], most blocks during this day were mined between 4 sat/vB and 500 sat/vB with an average of 8 sat/vB, which means that there were those who were paying much higher than the transaction fees, and in block 858115 there were those who paid more than 5000 sat/vB. Therefore, for the average user, there is no change in the average transaction fees.

[1] https://mempool.space/block/00000000000000000000d603674ab2e746897c9f576127195a21ce3e0f941c9a

If I'm paying 4 Sat/vB right now, which is equivalent to $0.34, I don't cheap out on fees. As a matter of fact, I'm paying exactly what's required for a high priority transaction to get through. Like it or not, that's what the network requires.

Bitcoin isn't a charity. It's a payment system. If there is a need for users to be charitable to miners, paying more than enough, in order for the system to continue running, then something must be wrong with it. It might not be sustainable at all. Fortunately, it isn't the case. The price of Bitcoin is more than $60,000 right now and just a few weeks ago, difficulty reaches another ATH which means the mining environment remains robust and highly competitive.

You're not bothered, but what about those who prefer to use Bitcoin on a daily basis, the very people Bitcoin is primarily created for? If you recommend for them to use centralized platforms or second layers instead, isn't it the same as not supporting Bitcoin miners since they aren't paying network fees anymore?


Many people are using options and that's not cheating. Are there rules to cheat on, to begin with? If LTC is cheaper than Bitcoin, then anybody is free to use LTC instead. In the same manner that if Monero is more private than Bitcoin then anybody is also free to prefer Monero instead. There is no rule and it's not necessary to be exclusive, to be religiously loyal. Humanity won't move forward if we stick to something merely for the sake of sticking to it.

Your logic is quite off once again. It doesn't follow that since a medium is good for moving value it is automatically a medium good for storing it.

I don't understand what's wrong with trying to 'time' our transactions to get the lowest tx fees. If your transactions aren't urgent, then you can just wait out for the fees to drop or if you're able to, then you can just conduct the transaction on LN. High transaction fee, or a volatile fee market is quite common for cryptos that are popular and shouldn't come at a surprise.

I wouldn't want to try to pay extra just to 'subsidise' miners when the halving comes along. Doesn't really make sense as our goals doesn't align in the first place.

well you need to support bitcoin miners. they rely on transaction fees more and more over the coming halvings. if you're going to try and cheap out on fees, i don't think they're going to like that. unfortunately it was a very quick spike but at least they got something but i know they want more. and no i'm not bothered by higher fees since i don't use bitcoin for daily transactions. 


that's cheating though if you're avoiding btc because ltc is cheaper. why not just use ltc exclusively? if it's good enough for transferring your money around then it's good enough for storing it there.

That was only a quick spike in the fees. Right now, it's back to 4 sat/vB.

And I don't fault people for timing their transactions. It's unfair to call them cheap for making the most of the rise and fall of the network traffic. And who wants to pay exorbitant fees really? At "$105 per transfer", you don't actually want people to use Bitcoin as designed. Aren't you yourself bothered paying this high a fee for your ordinary transactions? Would you not mind paying a fee that's more expensive than what you're buying?

Your logic is quite off. I'm using the right crypto because I'm paying high transaction fees? That doesn't sound reasonable. And proof of work is the reason? I use LTC at times. It's proof of work and its cheap.

hopefully there's more staking. miners are fine with it and the more useful bitcoin can be for different things that helps ensure its longevity irregardless of some peoples desire to skirt paying the going fee. trying to "time" transactions like Loyce has a thread about is kind of like being a cheapo and not really supporting the network in my opinion. no miner wants to have people like that.  

one thing to keep in mind about staking into any project is that you no longer control your bitcoin. so the entire thing could be a scam...

I can see the fee started to rise at 1:36 pm but the mempool high fee priority at 3:00 pm was 8 sat/vbyte. Later it got back to 4 sat/vbyte.

   

All occured in just less than 2 hours and the mempool is so less congested right now again as if nothing happened. 4 sat/vbyte transactions are getting confirmed right now.