Topic: Bitcoin network is rejecting Bitcoin microtransactions (Read 3439 times)

To your surprise, you can send no-fee instant micro off-chain tx in various sites such as coinbase.

If you really need to send out microtransactions frequently, get yourself a coinbase account, and ask all your recipients to give you their deposit addresses on coinbase.

Exactly the idea staying behind Bitcoin -
No limits on electronic payment transactions.


Smart people don't have any need to send their bitcoin back and forth.

To your surprise, most real banks offers no-fee money transfers within the same bank,
so large banks make this offer available to multi-Ms of  clients for free,
exactly as mobile telephony networks offer free calls within the network,
not making people to sit 24h/365 to talk and talk forever.

Nothing new under the Sun.

If your intention is to find the way to limit number of Bitcoin transactions,
so doubling the transaction fee every year you can easily freeze Bitcoin network.

Smart real bank systems can handle Bs of transactions
so please don't suggest Bitcoin network has no prospects to grow.

+1

People can keep sending their bitcoin back and forth with no cost, and the whole network will be clogged.
Those "real" transactions can hardly be included in a block then...

Imagine what would happen without any fees whatsoever. Everybody could make as much transactions as they like with as small amounts as they like. That could possibly result in maybe 10, or 100, or 1000, or even higher transactions per second. I think the network, full clients, and storage capacity wouldn't be anywhere near capable of tackling that situation. Hence resulting in the end of Bitcoin.

And yet with fees, it doesn't.


Think hard, then I'm sure you can think of other advantages.

you said:


Miners or (minters = money minting) are rewarded by default ( 25 BTC today)
so there is no need to set any priority on the inclusion of one's transaction into the next block.

Acting otherwise, miners or "minters" can demand higher and higher transaction fees to be offered
to have transaction hashed within a block, making Bitcoin payments to collapse
transaction fees to double and double on every strike by miners ( minters)
forcing those accepting Bitcoin payments to establish Bitcoin block hashing agency to
keep business sound.


How much in transaction fee makes you to include a specific transaction into the new block ?

And "faster confirmation" stays for what ?

5 min, 1 hour, 1 day , 1 month ?

It looks like
Bitcoin can collapse on transaction fee doubled from time to time
Bitcoin can collapse on no-fee transaction to be delayed or even never included into the new hashed block

So Bitcoin network turns into Easy Entry - Hard Exit  Game

You can accept Bitcoin payments buy to have pay a large transaction fee to exit Bitcoin game.

First Class traditional banks offer clients no-fee transaction today
so the only business in accepting Bitcoin is deflanatory feature built-it into generation of Bitcoins.

If you can delay Bitcoin payment transaction so you can easily violate the trust in 1 BTC at $900
transactions, since why should we risk buying Bitcoins, accepting Bitcoins as payments
if you can stop us with spending Bitcoins, doubling transaction fee from time to time,
making small Bitcoin payments expensive, since transaction fee can make 50% or more of the sum transferred.

So my advise to miners ( minters) is to keep transaction fee as low-as-possible,
accept no-fee transactions, don't delay zero-fee transactions
and play fair, since otherwise interest in Bitcoin can easily dimnish.

I think this is important to add in terms of issues that has been raised
Transaction fees serve 2 purposes in the Bitcoin network. It rewards the miners for confirming transactions and also sets a priority on the inclusion of your transaction in the next block. ie, if you pay a higher transaction fee, chances are greater you will be included in the next block so that it can be verified and confirmed. For faster confirmations, spend more on the transaction fee.

No service is really free. I know miners are rewarded by the block reward of 25BTC, but that's just to kick start this endeavour. In my opinion the whole fee system is working just fine, preventing the network from flooding and securing the future of Bitcoin by making sure people still want to mine.
There is no way you should connect mining to the exchange rate. For example banks can also not be held accounted for the exchange rate of say dollar/euro. That is complete nonsense.

Satoshi whitepaper (please read it!):
http://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf


Go ahead!  Nobody is stopping you.  You can create a mining pool that only confirms transactions that are free (no transaction fee).  Everybody who agrees with you can join your pool.  There is no reason that free transactions can't be confirmed if enough people believe as you do.

It looks like
Bitcoin idea by Satoshi has no future
since transactions can be easily disrupted by miners on strike, requesting more and more money
in transaction fees.

Let me know what is a chance to have Google to join Bitcoin as No.1 Miner
to process every dust, micro, nano Bitcoin transactions as intended by Satoshi.

Real bank money transfer, payment transactions are almost free
so if you are not a miner, there is no sense to buy Bitcoin, risk Bitcoin processing, storing, transaction
verification to buy goods since withy real money transactions are processed on-line at zero-award, fee-free if you have account with one of key banks.

Scott Li is exactly testing microtransactions in Bitcoin ( micro nano transactions) for us .
Name of his service is #TipperCoin on Twitter.

If Scott fails to succeed so the only chance for Bitcoin to survive is price of Bitcoin to rise on speculation by investment funds.

Overnight risk for traders to accept payments in Bitcoin is too high.

Two of my friends founded private banks 20 years ago
and any risk in banking system must be contained.

Since risk in price fluctuactions of Bitcoin v. Dollar cannot be contained
the only risk free business transacted is the business by Bitcoin miners, minting 25 Bitcoins
for sale.

Market is flooded with thousands of Th/s miners today
so it's now a time for major players like Google, IBM to join
Bitcoin mining markets with Ph/s miners,
reducing number of individual miners to Zero.

Miners are insiders within Bitcoin network.
Non-Miners are outsiders within Bitcoin network.

Outsiders are controlled by insiders (a small group of miners setting their own rules to make as much Bitcoins as possible).

So the only way for Bitcoin Network to survive is to accept zero-fee, no-award transactions (microBitcoin, nanoBitcoin,  BitcoinTips since otherwise Bitcoin democracy is controlled by supremacy of few miners at no risk of Bitcoin vs. Dollar fluctuactions in exchange rate.

No, not if Bitcoin becomes very popular. In the new client they are trying to develop a more organic way to determine the fee at a given moment to get a transaction through. Then it could even be lower than it is now.
What in your opinion is a dust payment in dollars? 1 dollar? 1 cent? 0.01 cent?
Can't argue with that, but miners decide. Do you think it should be handled different, then how?
Again, in dollars, what is poor and what is rich?
I think Bitcoin was not designed specially for the rich or the poor. It was designed to get rid of banks. In that way it saves in costs, most of the time people have to pay just for having an account. Also, it makes paying via the internet very easy because it is part of it.

I would personally want to hit you upside the head with a stick for sending me $.05 in bitcoin, it makes it hard to spend as you said and I really don't care about a nickel. If I made you laugh, just laugh.

There is no reason that transactions like that have to be broadcast on the network, though. They could all be handled in an internal database, then paid out in lump sums.

I understand the need and purpose of fees, and for most transactions, the fees are insignificant as advertised, but I disagree with you when it comes to something like TipperCoin for Twitter. They charge a mandatory BTC.0001 miners fee for each tip you leave. I see $0.05 as a reasonable amount someone would want to leave just for making you laugh or answering a question but the fee is 160% of the actual amount to send. And I think this is where Bitcoin could really shine. This is something where if it takes a day to show up, I don't think it really matters, and even if it isn't feeless, I think that an .000001 fee would be sufficient just to get it above all the feeless transactions.

I'm just going to walk away now, because stupid like that just can't be reasoned with.

Are you serious ?
If transaction fee increases by 10 per cent on every block reward halved
so according to your suggestion, transaction fee is to eat up any sum transferred in a future.



.


I am sorry but many people don't have a lot of bitcoins today and not every man is a millionaire today
( 1,000 bitcoins made $ 1,000,000 only 2 months ago)

 
Any transaction is just a valid Bitcoin transfer transaction.



Do you suggest Mr. Satoshi developed his Bitcoin idea for the rich only ?

According to your opinion, his great idea of no middle-man bank has been turned upside down into
Bitcoin bank for the rich.

World of made of 7Bs poor and  just few Ms rich.

Bitcoin bank was developed for the poor since the rich don't need virtual bank or virtual currency since they are satisfied with present banking standards and can afford bank fees.

Bitcoin was exactly developed to let parties save on transactions tools.

Ever increased transaction fees can disrupt any great idea like the one by Mr. Satoshi.

As adoption increases, transaction volume should increase. As the block reward is halved, it is anticipated that fees transacted will increase to compensate.

The fees now are not prohibitively expensive, and keep people from spamming the blockchain unless they have a lot of bitcoins. People with a lot of bitcoins probably aren't going to spam the chain like a bunch of clueless shatoshi dice newbies who have no idea what they are doing and how it affects bitcoin.

Well, the miners do have the BTC reward right now which is rather substantial, so I do think agree that fees should be rather low right now. What about raising fees as time goes by because the reward is being lowered?

It looks like Stratum protocol is a nice solution to your problems.
No network clog risk.

http://mining.bitcoin.cz/stratum-mining

Frankly speaking I would prefer Mr. Satoshi (vs. Satochi) to stay Bitcoin boss forever
and comment "improvements" made, implemented by developers on a permanent basis, as exactly in case of Linux and  Linus Torvalds, principal author of the Linux kernel.

As suggested before, Bitcoin network can / cannot be clogged by a volume of transactions made in a future Blockchain made of > BTC 0.01 or < BTC 0.01 microtransactions.

It's not smart to suggest Bitcoin network cannot survive Bitcoin microtransactions once implemented and supported since alike clog can happen by volume of  > BTC 0.01 transactions on the global success of Bitcoin payments in a near future.


It's not smart to suggest, transaction fee is the only solution to control the volume of Bitcoin transactions and keep Bitcoin network on and operational now or in near future.

Frankly speaking, cloud computing mining, offered by IT powerful global VIPs can easily take control over Bitcoin mining, reducing number of individual Bitcoin miners to 0.

What we speak about is a number of solutions to let Bitcoin network to survive longer time than early gold rush years.

It looks like Bitcoin microtransactions can help Bitcoin network to survive, attracting millions of new clients, promoting Bitcoin globe-wide.

If you suggest Bitcoin dust money microtransactions can clog the network today, so we need to build
Bitcoin2 network right now, accepting microtransactions and accepting Bitcoin satoshis as exactly FED controlled banks accepted every penny or cent in the past, keep accepting and declare to accept in the future.

There is no such legal term like "money dust" or "Bitcoin dust".
Bitcoin satoshi is legal tender within Bitcoin network.

It does appear you have some knowledge about the subject, and yet you don't. I bet if you reason with that knowledge that you have, then you know just as well as the rest of us do that your point of view isn't right.

Some answers:
- Micro transactions are allowed in Bitcoin, but only works when at least one decent miner accepts it.
- 'WE' are the miners, they don't accept dust payments. It would clog up the network.
- Satochi designed Bitcoin so it could accept micro transactions, but also chose to let the decision to do so to the miners.
- Mister Satochi is not the owner or boss of Bitcoin. He designed the first versions, now a whole bunch of developers are improving it.
- Not only the block headers have to be kept in memory, but all transactions ever made. With micro transaction used freely, the block chain would become very large very quickly. And because miners make Bitcoin work, and processing transactions cost time and energy, they can choose to ignore those. Probably because they 'only' get 25 BTC for it.
- Again, there is not one man in charge. It is closer to democracy.

It looks like you are demanding is should be free, and otherwise it's not fair. But every product or service cost money.
Just suck it up as it is, and go from there. And I would be happy to answer questions on the way.

Include all fee transactions first, then fill up the block up to the maximum size with no fee transactions. But I guess you will slightly increase orphan rate when using block with maximum size (1MB).