Topic: del - page 2. (Read 1889 times)

Bitcoin is not meant to send micro transactions and that is how things are going with the current developments, i am not sure whether the vision of satoshi will be like this,but the convenience factor to send micro transaction have to be neglected and we have to start considering bitcoin to store our assets than using it as a currency.

Do micropayments through offchain networks instead of blockchain?

Like fund a credit card or something similar and make microbuyings with the balance.

Also 10% or 20% still might still be cheaper for some transactions through more conventional ways, for example, for payments in certains countries, the fees and time required would be too costy

yes we all are paying the high transaction fees in the bitcoin network and still we are here. why don't we jist switch to some other altcoin, i am sure altcoins do not charge this much for just transferring them to one person to another and in addition if we think its price flustuation matters then it actully depends on us. if we increase its volume and popularity then it can became more stable like bitcoin

Most payment processors charge their customers depending on how much the purchase is. Higher purchase = higher fees whereas in bitcoins, it's not entitely the case. For example A, if it is cheaper to use visa than bitcoin, then I'd go for visa. That simple. I wouldn't frustrate myself so hard on a simple solution which is accessible to me.

As for micropayments, it really is bothering since bitcoin is losing its edge due to tx fees (which is an insane $1-$2 to get your tx on the soonest block possible). Larger blocks 'might' be a temporary fix for the said issue, I suppose.

the middle man has been replaced by thouands of groaning machines sucking up a country's worth of electricity. that costs and someone has to pay for it somewhere.

in theory the middle man will always be cheaper. it's a guy with a database. it's the fact you can't trust him not to screw you that counts.

everyone knows fees are a necessity. the block reward has been disguising them. the real cost of a transaction is about $7 but its subsidised. that's always been the case.

One of the selling points for using Bitcoin is that the costs are lower because there is no middle man and low fees so merchants would prefer it over credit cards because it's cheaper. If that's not the case anymore, then it could hold the value of Bitcoin down.

It may be that in the future, Bitcoin will only be used for large purchases so the fees would be a lower percentage of the purchase.

10% or 20%.

Bitcoin transfer fees are still much more affordable than its competitors:



80 cents, 0.0006 is about the number of stamps a person would put on an envelope to send a letter in the united states.

I've never heard anyone complain about how much stamps cost to send a letter.

OP you have it spot on..... the biggest advantage Bitcoin had over other payment methods were the cheap micro transactions and now with these

spam attacks and the higher fees, this advantage have been nullified. Most people in developed countries do not worry much about high fees, but

for people in developing countries, this is a huge problem because most of their transactions are micro transactions. I paid $7 a day or to ago to

transfer $20 and that is just unacceptable. { This was the default setting for the fee, set by the wallet provider } 

nope. why should i burn money for the honor of using bitcoin? screw that. and if i have to buy it in the first place then unless i have money on an exchange already that's another 3-10% in premium for localbitcoins, atm, coinbase. forget it.

Larger blocks wouldn't change how feasible microtransactions are in the long term.  Microtransactions have never actually been feasible on Bitcoin because the transaction size is changed by how many payments a person has taken in order to spend that amount of Bitcoin.  Transaction fees aren't only insignificant on large transactions because they're similar to the cost of smaller ones, it's also because people who spend large transactions are likely to receive them too, so their fees don't grow very much.  If someone was using Bitcoin as a currency though and 100 people deposit 0.001 into his wallet, when he tries to spend 0.1 it'll be inconvenient as hell.

LN might change it due to the possibility of offchain transactions for them instead.  But it seems unlikely that a consensus allowing it to happen would ever be reached, and even then LN would take years to be pulled out of beta and actually be ready for widespread use or be implemented.

The conflict here is that mining really profitably and getting far with it requires a person to be wealthy.  And since miners basically have the vote for a consensus to be reached, it's a collection of wealthy people which we're trusting to vote in favour of getting less money.  Unless Bitcoin mining wasn't based on profit, which would never happen, a consensus isn't going to be reached and the system isn't going to change.

So basically, paying for coffee with Bitcoin was just a gimmick.  It was never going to be practical in the long term and people who did it thinking that it would be were just following a gimmick in my view.  My theory is that the transaction fees won't get so much higher that it's impractical to do anything, but it will change Bitcoin's key audience to what it was basically destined to be - wealthy people and people transferring large amounts of money (for example, expats sending their money back home).  There are many situations in which people who were aware enough of Bitcoin would do this and use it as a digital asset.

The price will keep rising because people who put money into Bitcoin will be putting more and more in as they trust it more.  The actual user base and practicality is unlikely to change.

Then use Litecoin

This type of problem would likely become a threat for bitcoin's existence. Who would pay 10-20% of fee? Even rich people would be mad due to the very high fees. Also, this is why bitcoin is still impractical when it comes to a daily basis of usage.

I would rather cash out my BTC instead of using BTC for many transactions, especially on microtransactions. Cash will not require fees when on a face to face payment, so why use bitcoin. I still prefer fiat in using for payments, and bitcoin for me is for earning.

i'm lucky that i don't like coffe, and i don't do microtransaction basically never, unless we are talking about food, but even then you can buy food in bulk

with bitcoin i think i'll do every shopping online in bulk, with a minimum threshold far higher than what i'm doing with visa this should at least alleviate the problem a bit

I do not think that many people will use bitcoin if that happens.
Most people use bitcoin for the convenience and if we are charged 10-20% more then it will no longer be a convenient payment option i guess.

Fees are already too high.  

The Second and I mean the Second , Coinbase gets off of their ass , and allows direct LTC purchases,
I will have no further use for BTC after that.  

Until that moment, I am stuck having to use it.  


 

If you are talking about the fees which 10%-20% of our bitcoins will deducted from the transaction, then i will say that yes. I will still use bitcoin because it is secure and still fast in doing transactions, it is better for me to pay an average to expensive fees per transaction rather than exposing myself to the internet people. It is just a comfortable currency for me and i will still use it whatever will happen.

this topic has nothing new or different from the other one apart from being self moderated!

the problem is not "nowadays" it is only during spam attacks where there is a lot of transactions inside the mempool. and yes we all know fees have gone up and we have to pay $0.4 per transactions now to get a high enough priority to get our transaction confirmed faster.

and there is nothing we can do about it apart from paying higher fees during spam attacks, paying less fees when they stop and support a solution you think is best by running a full node or direct your hashpower if you have any.
but making a new topic about the oldest discussion here doesn't make any difference.

I sort of have to agree. I used to buy gift cards for places like starbucks on a regular basis from sites like gyft as well in 10$ installments. But everytime I buy one now, I end up spending an extra 7%. Coinbase used to have no fees, but they started charging too , recently.

Depends, if sending bitcoins remains cheaper than any other form of sending money, then yes. I doubt btc will get up anywhere near that high, anytime soon though. NO worries.

paying anything above say 2% makes it not really beneficial for people/merchants.
- this is because the effort to actually getting bitcoin is one hurdle, then finding a merchant (300k out of 200mill merchants) is another hurdle. so then paying 2%+ to use bitcoin starts to erode all utility.

the only utility then is that the funds are 100% yours, you can send them out without someone elses need to agree to send it or accept it. this is known as a push payment.
- however by removing the push payment utility to openly pay anyone, and turn it into a 'just fund xapo' or 'lock it into an LN channel' removes the permissionless push utility and now funds need a counter party to sign off/agree to the movement of funds

thus now removing the other main utility of bitcoin.

so now the utility has become much like fiat. all we are left with is people that are just looking at the FIAT price daily hoping to get rich quick just to return back to fiat.

leading to the only thing that people will talk about bitcoin being "you can be FIAT rich one day"