Pages:
Author

Topic: Bitcoin Transaction Volume - page 2. (Read 15829 times)

newbie
Activity: 51
Merit: 0
July 05, 2011, 12:48:30 AM
#23
you can always assume that someone will be mining
Eventually, mining stops, since the supply of potential coins is capped at a number about 4x the current number in existence.

Mining will not stop. people will pay to mine (by paying the electric bill) just to keep their own transactions going, also to keep their investment secure.
legendary
Activity: 1204
Merit: 1002
July 05, 2011, 12:40:10 AM
#22
you can always assume that someone will be mining
Eventually, mining stops, since the supply of potential coins is capped at a number about 4x the current number in existence.
jr. member
Activity: 56
Merit: 1
July 05, 2011, 12:31:40 AM
#21
Right now, we still get a pretty quick response even if we don't pay transaction fees. But if the network ever started getting clogged, you could pay a small transaction fee to be given higher priority. In the future, it is possible that transactions without fees take days, while transactions with fees go much quicker.

As the volume of transactions gets higher and the incentive for finding blocks gets lower (bitcoins per block get divided by 2 every 4 years, and difficulty is rising quickly), isn't there a risk that in the future, fees become the main incentive, increase dramatically in price (and also become unavoidable)? Then doing a bitcoin transaction would be for rich people only. We certainly don't want Bitcoin to become a rich people tool – those who can afford the high taxes.

Yes, that is a possibility. But since the network is open, you can always assume that someone will be mining and taking free transaction, for the good of the network. It might take a while to get confirmed, but it'll go through sooner or later. And if transaction fees were really getting high, that is just incentive for more miners to get involved. If people are leaving the bitcoin network because of high fees, then miners have a reason to try accepting more low fees, to keep the network alive. It should all work itself out. The future structure of fees isn't yet completely clear, and everything is still tweak-able.
sr. member
Activity: 288
Merit: 263
Firstbits.com/1davux
July 05, 2011, 12:25:55 AM
#20
Right now, we still get a pretty quick response even if we don't pay transaction fees. But if the network ever started getting clogged, you could pay a small transaction fee to be given higher priority. In the future, it is possible that transactions without fees take days, while transactions with fees go much quicker.

As the volume of transactions gets higher and the incentive for finding blocks gets lower (bitcoins per block get divided by 2 every 4 years, and difficulty is rising quickly), isn't there a risk that in the future, fees become the main incentive, increase dramatically in price (and also become unavoidable)? Then doing a bitcoin transaction would be for rich people only. We certainly don't want Bitcoin to become a rich people tool – those who can afford the high taxes.
jr. member
Activity: 56
Merit: 1
June 29, 2011, 12:47:41 PM
#19
I think you just found a inescapable vulnerability, what if someone sets up two accounts and they just send bitcoin back and forth.  It would crash the system.  I can see no fix. 

This has been discussed.  The fix is transaction fees.

Knew there had to be a fix somewhere thanks.  When do transaction fees kick in.

Transaction fees have already kicked in. Right now, we still get a pretty quick response even if we don't pay transaction fees. But if the network ever started getting clogged, you could pay a small transaction fee to be given higher priority. In the future, it is possible that transactions without fees take days, while transactions with fees go much quicker.  
legendary
Activity: 1708
Merit: 1010
June 29, 2011, 12:46:09 PM
#18
Two questions maybe someone can answer:

How could one determine the ACTUAL number of BTC transfered daily?


www.bitcoinwatch.com

Quote
Where do transaction fees go?

Transaction fees are added to the block reward given to the miner who finds the solution to the block your transaction is included within.
newbie
Activity: 58
Merit: 0
June 29, 2011, 12:43:36 PM
#17
Two questions maybe someone can answer:

How could one determine the ACTUAL number of BTC transfered daily?

Where do transaction fees go?
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 500
legendary
Activity: 2100
Merit: 1000
April 22, 2011, 12:08:32 PM
#15
This is a great approach. thanks so much Smiley
legendary
Activity: 1652
Merit: 2301
Chief Scientist
April 22, 2011, 09:54:09 AM
#14
A better global metric of transaction volume would be the number of bitcoindays destroyed.

Very good idea.  Anybody want to implement it?  I've got a Python tool that walks the block chain gathering transaction statistics:
  https://github.com/gavinandresen/bitcointools/blob/master/statistics.py

Teaching it to compute 'bitcoindays destroyed' shouldn't be terribly hard.  I think.

This morning I taught it to add just the smallest or just the largest output in each TxOut and report the range to get an estimate of 'true' transaction value being exchanged without counting change TxOuts or mining pool payouts.

So, to be conservative, assume that the biggest-value TxOut for every transaction is change and the smallest is the actual bitcoins being transferred.  Taking the smallest TxOut of all the transactions last month, an average of about 35,000 BTC were sent per day.

This month the average is about 55,000 BTC per day.   Add in the MtGox trading volume to get a reasonable lower estimate of something like 70-80,000 BTC changing hands every day.
legendary
Activity: 2506
Merit: 1010
April 21, 2011, 03:51:00 AM
#13
I believe that the bitcoindays measure is a good indicator of market health and participation.

Of course this activity will not reflect activity that occurs within eWallet services such as MyBitcoin and Mt. Gox.  Those transactions made between accounts within the service are never seen by the Bitcoin network.
sr. member
Activity: 294
Merit: 273
April 20, 2011, 04:51:48 PM
#12
A better global metric of transaction volume would be the number of bitcoindays destroyed.
This is a really good idea, and would be a great way to measure velocity.
+1
Excellent point, ByteCoin!
legendary
Activity: 1708
Merit: 1010
April 20, 2011, 03:37:30 PM
#11
A better global metric of transaction volume would be the number of bitcoindays destroyed.


This is a really good idea, and would be a great way to measure velocity.
sr. member
Activity: 416
Merit: 277
April 20, 2011, 03:28:41 PM
#10
A better global metric of transaction volume would be the number of bitcoindays destroyed.

I believe that transactions are prioritized according to the value of the transaction multiplied by the amount of time since the coins were spent. A similar concept is useful in measuring the transaction volume.

If someone has 100BTC that they received a week ago and they spend it then 700 bitcoin days have been destroyed. If they take those 100BTC and send them to several addresses and then spend them then although the total transaction volume could be arbitrarily large the number of bitcoindays destroyed is still 700.

Currently, bitcoindays are replenished at around six million bitcoindays per day which reflects that there are about six million bitcoins in existence.

If there are days when there are few transactions then the total number of bitcoindays increases dramatically. If everyone exchanged all their bitcoins at once then the total number of bitcoindays would be reduced to zero. Some bitcoins will never be spent because the private keys have been lost (or never existed) so the number of bitcoindays will never actually fall to zero.

Note how transaction flooding and mix-network activity do not significantly influence the number of bitcoindays destroyed. I believe that the bitcoindays measure is a good indicator of market health and participation.

ByteCoin
hero member
Activity: 717
Merit: 501
April 20, 2011, 01:56:28 PM
#9
I think you just found a inescapable vulnerability, what if someone sets up two accounts and they just send bitcoin back and forth.  It would crash the system.  I can see no fix. 

This has been discussed.  The fix is transaction fees.

Knew there had to be a fix somewhere thanks.  When do transaction fees kick in.
hero member
Activity: 726
Merit: 500
April 20, 2011, 01:53:50 PM
#8
I think you just found a inescapable vulnerability, what if someone sets up two accounts and they just send bitcoin back and forth.  It would crash the system.  I can see no fix. 

This has been discussed.  The fix is transaction fees.
sr. member
Activity: 493
Merit: 250
Don't trust "BBOD The Best Futures Exchange"
April 20, 2011, 01:51:18 PM
#7
If you built up a map of the blocks from blockexplorer you could identify coins that were circulating through small networks, perhaps two wallet files, or a small group of friends
hero member
Activity: 717
Merit: 501
April 20, 2011, 01:41:14 PM
#6
I think you just found a inescapable vulnerability, what if someone sets up two accounts and they just send bitcoin back and forth.  It would crash the system.  I can see no fix. 
hero member
Activity: 840
Merit: 1000
April 20, 2011, 01:30:49 PM
#5
Is there anyway a more accurate number could be calculated? One way would be to only count the smaller part of the transaction, assuming people are spending less than half of their total wallet.  This would at least be an underestimate instead of a nearly meaningless number.
legendary
Activity: 2100
Merit: 1000
April 20, 2011, 12:21:46 PM
#4
Someone was sending the same ~95000 BTC repeatedly. He could have gotten the "daily sent BTC" to 22 million if he kept it up.

Thanks for clarifying+
Pages:
Jump to: