Topic: Bitcoin Fees - $59! Holy shit! - page 2. (Read 3296 times)

that  is  sotashi  didt  realized!the  fee  cant automatically  adjust  accoding  the price that  is  a  big disaster for transation  when  you  use  bitcoin! so some  altcoin  is  replacing the  game!

Roger Ver is an ex-convict and known liar. He told the public Mt. Gox was ok and then it got robbed. He told the public that Bitcoin Unlimited was “production ready” and then the entire network crashed. He is the brainchild of Bitcoin Cash but lies to the public that he “found out about it after it launched”. All of this is public information. The fee Roger Showed was “artificially generated” and you can make a high fee also by splitting coins. You cannot trust a word from Roger Ver.

He says that the fee is $59 not $5, its much bigger than your fee. If really the fee is $59, so bitcoin will be leave by its user.
As i know $5 per transaction is good.  Hope can be lower than.

Yeah i'm not so keen on the fees either but I guess nothing in life is free...

Bitcoin fees is what puts me away from bitcoin entirely.

You must know the total amount of bitcoins transacted before you can conclude the fee is exorbitant.

Fee is so little i send 100$ to user in china and pay 1.16$ only

if you want your money to arrive fast will pay more fee .

No 
Also the headline of this task is misleading, and the word "shit" wrongly used ... At best stupidity would be the right word for someone paying this amount of fees.

The fee never depends on the amount of bitcoin value. It depends on the size of a transaction. A transaction can have 100s or thousands of entries, that add to the size of a transaction. Hence fees are paid in Satoshi per Byte.
Imagine you are a service, and have to pay 250 users some Satoshis in the next 2 or 3 blocks. Assume you have one input (your own UTXO), then you have a tx with 250 outputs, with each tx output having roughly 40Bytes output Bytes in it's easiest form: TX_OUT Value (uint64_t), TX_OUT PK_Script Length (var_int), TX_OUT pk_script (uchar[]). A good approximation for P2PKH tx is:
--> fee = (n_inputs * 148 + n_outputs * 34 + 10) * price_per_byte
That creates a tx with approx. 10 kbytes in size. If you have to pay 100 Satoshis per byte, then this creates 10.000 * 100 = 1mio Satoshi fee, equals to 0.01 Bitcoin, currently ~50 Euros.
But! 
You can reduce the fees to 15 Satoshi per byte, then it will get later into a block, and the fees reduce to less than 10 Euros.   
A very small transaction with one input an one output is in the range of 228 bytes, with 100 Satoshi per byte the fees would be 22800 Satoshis, 0.00028 bitcoins (somewhere in the 1 Euro range).

Experts to the front to prove/reject my math 

The majority here seems to ignore this fee specification, and prefers to follow the fud and useless emotional energy waste. Get informed, and save fees, or stay dumb and pay the fees!
And Roger should have mentioned this, when he did the transaction, or even provide a a link to the tx, so we could look it up. Otherwise it seems to be an intentionally misleading of the community.

Next step for low fee transactions (coffee, online books, ...): look at lightning!
(And then you understand, why miners are against SegWit and Lightning, cause their basis of revenue is reduced dramatically by the network).

Isn't the fee depends on the amount of BTC sending per transaction ? I also believe Roger Ver is more in to Bitcoin Cash, so he may be giving an hint that go for BCC instead of BTC. What do you guys think?

it depends on the size of the value of the transaction being sent or receive. In some wallet you can customize the fee per byte of your transaction. My normal fee i am using is 50 per byte so if i am sending around 50 bucks my fee would be 2$ per transaction. In his case maybe he send a high value of bitcoin because the transaction fee is 59$

looking at his tx, I'm seeing inputs from 3... aren't these multisig addresses?
these multisig inputs are responsible for that big of tx size (beside the reason of 300+ inputs)
paying $1000 tx fee to get $100 worth of BTC 
even if you launder your money, you won't get charged that high

btw the 3... addresses are tied to multisig or segwit? 

its just normal because bitcoins value these days are so high and thats why the transaction fees are also high but if the value of bitcoin will drop , then the fees will also decrease. for me its just ok and nothing to worry about because it is a natural event or phenomenon and were not new about this issue , infact this problem has been discuss all the time and they cant do about it , so if your not ok with it, then better find a coin that has a low fee like dogecoin and litecoin.

A few years ago bitcoins price was only a fraction from what it is today. For today's market I consider a 1.8$ a fair price considering the fees that other payment processors charge. Bitcoin is still imperfect, we know that, but there are people who are working extremely hard to improve bitcoin and fulfill it's full potential.
I don't know why you're preaching for bitcoin cash, paid shill or not you're missing the bigger picture.

People please look back at the date when this thread was started. This was during the pre-SegWit stage when the MemPool

was spammed. A lot has changed since then and this thread serve no purpose anymore. Roger Ver and his cronies are behind

a lot of Fud that are being generated around Bitcoin. {because they are supporting other forks} ...Since SegWit was

implemented the Mempool was congested when the miners decided to mine Bitcoin Cash. {because it was more profitable

than BTC, but things quickly returned to normal.}  

Why are you panicking so much? It is only up-to user to pay the fee maybe the size of his transaction is really high so that he paid 50$ so that his transaction get confirmed, I have seen many transaction with more then 100$ so that is just normal for me. I bet his transaction size is high so he paid high fee to get his transaction confirmed in no time .

It was the wallet block.io service drover who would not let me change the rate. Had to swallow in the dry it!
Making mistakes and learning!
haha

A few years ago the fees were hard coded in the software. And then whenever they went above about 10c everyone complained and they would reduce the set fee by a factor of 10! So I really don't understand why anyone would regard $1.8 as acceptable when the fix is so trivial - see post above.

(Well - trivial to program - but a hard fork - so very tricky to roll out - although BitcoinCash managed it).

You are blaming the wrong people. Issue is not the miners they do not set the fees. People sending the bitcoins set the fees - the miners just choose which transactions get into a block - so obviously prioritise those with big fees!

Issue is that there are more people wanting to send transactions than there is space in the blocks.

So cause is the fact that the blocks are only 1,000,000 bytes is size (or bit bigger if you can send segwit Tx's - which you can't with BitcoinCore GUI).

To fix this you just need to ask the BitcoinCore developers to increase the block size - and then the cost per tx will come down.

Obviously cost of running a full node will go up a bit as will need a bigger harddisk/network connection. But even if they made it 10 times bigger would only need 0.5Tb per year of extra space (and 150kbit/sec network bandwidth) - which is only going to cost you about $20 - so not really going to stop anyone! Especially with all the savings on fees they will be making!

Of course it's Roger Ver but you also have to take into account that this thread is quite old and was posted prior to the segwit activation. If you check https://bitcoinfees.21.co/ today you will see that the median transaction fee right now is about 30 thousand satoshis (around 1.8$ at the time I'm writing this). So complaining about transaction fees right now is complete BS.

LOL. Is it really worth to pay 0.22BTC for 0.018BTC? Why have you choose a fee of 247 sat/byte? Half this and you would have received 0.11BTC more, which is already 6x what you received.

How did you even received have that many low-amount inputs anyway?