Excessive Bitcoin fees - page 5. | Bitcointalksearch.org

ABCbits

legendary

Activity: 2856

Merit: 7410

Crypto Swap Exchange

Quote from: moonie on February 26, 2024, 05:50:22 PM

It's February 26, 2024, and Bitcoin fees are high again. Didn't satoshi say we should always allow a certain number of free transactions?

Mining isn't charity activity, so don't expect miner or pool would do that. Besides, it's just suggestion and was never enforced by Bitcoin protocol.

Quote from: moonie on February 26, 2024, 05:50:22 PM

What good is a cryptocurrency for the un-banked that costs more than a bank to use?

IMO if those people are unbanked not due to lack of money, Bitcoin still offer some advantage.

Quote from: moonie on February 26, 2024, 05:50:22 PM

Why is the present status quo acceptable?

Personally i don't accept it, but Bitcoin community is on conservative side.

martinex

full member

Activity: 322

Merit: 128

Sugars.zone | DatingFi - Earn for Posting

It's natural that currently we see many people and investors increasingly enthusiastic about the prospects of bitcoin, especially as the price is a little closer to touching ATH again. Now. If this is the case, the transaction fee will automatically increase and it will subside by itself and BTC belongs to everyone, so it's not just those with strong hands who can afford it, we, ordinary people can also invest with BTC, it's just that the amount of ownership is different and this is definitely a way for investors to expand their investment reach beyond stocks and bonds.

Sebas.tian

full member

Activity: 2016

Merit: 156

This is one of the advantage that make me to like Bitcoin team, they feel the pain or worry about their investors to consider the gas fee before it makes their investors to start thinking another alternative that will make the team to lose investors. I think, the current gas fees that occur few days ago is not too high compared to other coin like Ethereum gas fee 45 where high fees is charged for every transaction their investors make, but Bitcoin gas fees is very low and it will make many companies to use this new gas fees to embrace Bitcoin again. Based on what happened to the gas fee of Bitcoin, I will definitely increase my capital when another bearish market appear, so that I will achieve more income than what I achieved few hours ago in the market.

adaseb

legendary

Activity: 3738

Merit: 1708

Bitcoin broke $53K, $54K, $55K, $56K and $57K today and the fees are 20 sats/byte. Which is very cheap. Looking at Ethereum the fees are 45 Gwei or so which is about $3 for a simple ETH transfer, so this isn't a concern really.

Most of us pretty much only do large transfers on these networks and use L2 for everything else. I have been doing this since 2017 pretty much and got used to it. Bitcoin network is not designed to be used to buy a cup of coffee and neither is Ethereum. This is where all the L2 networks like Lignting, Liquid, Arbitrium, Polygon, ZkSync, etc come into play.

Those networks are very cheap and transactions are very fast.

The Cryptovator

legendary

Activity: 2226

Merit: 2169

Need PR/CMC & CG? TG @The_Cryptovator

Due to fees or whatever reason, Bitcoin won't become centralised because it was designed in a decentralised way. A major part of Bitcoin would be handed over to centralised organisations if the fees increased significantly and the general public couldn't afford the transaction fees. But I do not expect this situation to occur; there will undoubtedly be a solution. We saw a few days ago that transaction fees were very high. But it was affordable, at least. Developers will find a solution to transaction fees.

moonie

jr. member

Activity: 30

Merit: 11

It's February 26, 2024, and Bitcoin fees are high again. Didn't satoshi say we should always allow a certain number of free transactions? What good is a cryptocurrency for the un-banked that costs more than a bank to use?

Why is the present status quo acceptable?

kryptqnick

legendary

Activity: 3094

Merit: 1385

Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!

Quote from: moonie on February 12, 2024, 01:40:27 PM

What will happen when only large institutions can afford to use Bitcoin's blockchain, due to rising fees? Won't this centralize the network if most can only trade bitcoin on centralized exchanges?

I don't think that's going to happen. The fees aren't progressing, they're just occasionally spiking. As was noted by others, the fees are currently very reasonable, for example, with less than $2 for a priority transaction. Also, I don't think that adoption of Bitcoin by large institutions will make the fee situation worse. Large institutions don't tend to make tons of small transactions, I believe, and they tend to have their own centralized (so, not on-chain) platforms for people who want to interact with Bitcoin or any other asset. So their impact shouldn't be significant, and regular people will be useful to use Bitcoin directly.

livingfree

hero member

Activity: 2786

Merit: 578

Quote from: moonie on February 12, 2024, 01:40:27 PM

What will happen when only large institutions can afford to use Bitcoin's blockchain, due to rising fees?

Even if Bitcoin fees go to $100 per transaction, I don't think that they'll be the only ones to afford to pay the fees. However, I do not wish to reach that point seeing it happen with Bitcoin because I did experience and saw that with ERC20 transactions.

It was a terrible experience and that's why if it happens for Bitcoin which it actually did last year, we just have to wait to let the network and its fee calm down.

Quote from: moonie on February 12, 2024, 01:40:27 PM

Won't this centralize the network if most can only trade bitcoin on centralized exchanges?

The network is already set and it won't change just because only those who can avail to pay the high fees don't make it centralized.

Rehan Zakir

member

Activity: 812

Merit: 53

I suggest that crypto companies introduce Bitcoin Layer 2 solution projects. Bitcoin transaction fees are very high, making transactions in Bitcoin annoying. Introducing Layer 2 solution projects could reduce fees by 10 times, similar to what Arbitrum, Optimism, and other Layer 2 projects have done. Exchanges also impose heavy fees on withdrawals, so reducing these excessive fees would be beneficial.

ABCbits

legendary

Activity: 2856

Merit: 7410

Crypto Swap Exchange

Quote from: moonie on February 12, 2024, 01:40:27 PM

What will happen when only large institutions can afford to use Bitcoin's blockchain, due to rising fees?

Nobody knows for sure. But i certainly hope Bitcoin community would also accept Bitcoin sidechain and increasing block size (following hardware/internet growth) as additional options to prevent that from happening.

Quote from: moonie on February 12, 2024, 01:40:27 PM

What will happen when only large institutions can afford to use Bitcoin's blockchain, due to rising fees? Won't this centralize the network if most can only trade bitcoin on centralized exchanges?

It won't centralize the network, assuming it's not expensive to run full node and no single group have majority of hashrate.

Alpha Marine

sr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 283

Quote from: Haunebu on February 12, 2024, 02:32:18 PM

BTC is already centralised to a certain extent though it's still largely decentralised thankfully. Ordinals and bullish behaviour are forcing fees to move upwards again and again which is something that everyone has already gotten used to at this point.

BTC is not in any way centralized. It has never been centralized and it's not centralized now. The BTC itself is yours, you own it, you can sell it when you want, or hold it forever.
The problem is using centralized means to deal with BTC. Like centralized exchanges and so on.
Drinking a new fine in an old glass doesn't make the wine an old win. So centralized institutions using BTC don't make BTC centralized

The dollar worth of fees is as low as just above a dollar currently, hopefully it gets even lower.

The fact that events in the economy affect Bitcoin doesn't make it centralized. The players of Bitcoin all live in an economy and if the events of the economy affect these players, then it might affect Bitcoin.

Richbased

full member

Activity: 238

Merit: 151

Quote from: moonie on February 12, 2024, 01:40:27 PM

What will happen when only large institutions can afford to use Bitcoin's blockchain, due to rising fees? Won't this centralize the network if most can only trade bitcoin on centralized exchanges?

Your questions are quite contradictory but however, it's not only large institutions that can afford the use of Bitcoin Blockchain due to high transactions fees because there are also individuals that have high amount of Bitcoins and wouldn't care about the transaction fees inasmuch as the system is decentralized.

Bitcoin was invented to be a decentralized currency so I don't see any reason or whatsoever that would tend to change the decentralized nature of Bitcoin regardless of high transactions fees or congestion in the mempool and moreover, recently we can vividly see that there have been a reduction in the congestion and transactions fees also reduced as well so hopefully with time everything is gonna normalize.

It is obvious that these congestion in mempool and high transactions fees have been a reoccurrence in the crypto industry and afterwards returns back to normalcy so it shouldn't cause a panic in anyway as the system would be restored by it's developers .

davis196

hero member

Activity: 2954

Merit: 906

Quote from: moonie on February 12, 2024, 01:40:27 PM

What will happen when only large institutions can afford to use Bitcoin's blockchain, due to rising fees? Won't this centralize the network if most can only trade bitcoin on centralized exchanges?

High transaction fees means bigger revenue and profits for the miners, so more miners will start mining BTC and the hashrate will get adjusted to another level. On the other hand, ridiculously high transaction fees will scare away many BTC investors and traders, therefore the demand for BTC will drop, which means that the BTC price will also drop. This will eventually lead to lower transaction fees. The market always finds ways to regulate itself. The level of decentralization of the BTC network doesn't depend of the number of users and companies, that are sending and receiving BTC. It depends on the number of active miners and nodes. However, I might be wrong about this, because I'm not a blockchain expert. Grin

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4214

Merit: 4458

Quote from: Bobrox on February 13, 2024, 12:11:54 AM

The main problem when sending bitcoin with difference kinds of wallet are excessive Bitcoin fees, for small transaction will get difficult choose they have paid over $3 to $5 and some time could be large amount of fees have to sent.

imagine any auction
where bidding starts at $1
in any scenario of competitive bids. imagine if the auction house incremented the next bid by $5, with 10 SEPARATE bids the price hits $51
now imagine if the auction house incremented the next bid by $0.10 with 10 separate bids the price hits $2

lowering the increment bidders have to fight over, allows more opportunity of priority without the fee going 50x

..
most wallets are based on core underlying code so follow their defaults. so first port-of-call is to get core to sort themselves out, then the rest will follow

moonie

jr. member

Activity: 30

Merit: 11

Quote from: Bobrox on February 13, 2024, 12:11:54 AM

The main problem when sending bitcoin with difference kinds of wallet are excessive Bitcoin fees, for small transaction will get difficult choose they have paid over $3 to $5 and some time could be large amount of fees have to sent. I think sending small fund of bitcoin as transaction is not friendly for user want to sent little amount of bitcoin but worth for huge amount of bitcoin.
Get possibilities increasing large fees bitcoin transaction in the future when bitcoin raise to higher price make small fund transaction not really worth when adopting bitcoin as payment transaction. Get exceptional if have or support with lightening network without take any fees transaction yet and likely is most worth way for sending bitcoin.

I agree, I'm sorry that the bitcoin experience hasn't improved

Quote from: franky1 on February 13, 2024, 12:10:45 AM

Quote from: moonie on February 13, 2024, 12:02:03 AM

Quote from: franky1 on February 12, 2024, 03:15:30 PM

ill ask again
anyone else think that the next node release should measure fees in bumps of 1sat per 10byte(100sat/kb)
instead of 5sat per byte(5000sat/kb) bump default, especially when entering the year of the next halving cycle/ATH year

where by if a 226byte tx was
266sat(1sat/byte) then 1356sat (6sat/byte) then 2486sat(11sat/byte) defaults
but instead were starting from
23sat(1sat/10byte) 46sat(2sat/10byte) 68sat(3sat/10byte)

Sure, it sounds reasonable to me for base fee to adjust in order to reflect increasingly valuable satoshis.
In fact, your account makes me think... what if devs conspire to keep base fee high in exchange for kickbacks from miners?

they dont get kickback from miners, because if they could they would have in last 15 years..
their kickback is make bitcoin expensive and annoying to promote the sandbox unfinished subnetworks that facilitate middlemen fee's for routed payments between institutions that sponsor them
(look into river financial hosting alot of the LN liquidity and sponsoring core devs as one of many examples, DCG previously)

this sounds like it could be an equally big issue of developer incentive misalignment

Bobrox

sr. member

Activity: 1134

Merit: 253

The main problem when sending bitcoin with difference kinds of wallet are excessive Bitcoin fees, for small transaction will get difficult choose they have paid over $3 to $5 and some time could be large amount of fees have to sent. I think sending small fund of bitcoin as transaction is not friendly for user want to sent little amount of bitcoin but worth for huge amount of bitcoin.
Get possibilities increasing large fees bitcoin transaction in the future when bitcoin raise to higher price make small fund transaction not really worth when adopting bitcoin as payment transaction. Get exceptional if have or support with lightening network without take any fees transaction yet and likely is most worth way for sending bitcoin.

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4214

Merit: 4458

Quote from: moonie on February 13, 2024, 12:02:03 AM

Quote from: franky1 on February 12, 2024, 03:15:30 PM

ill ask again
anyone else think that the next node release should measure fees in bumps of 1sat per 10byte(100sat/kb)
instead of 5sat per byte(5000sat/kb) bump default, especially when entering the year of the next halving cycle/ATH year

where by if a 226byte tx was
266sat(1sat/byte) then 1356sat (6sat/byte) then 2486sat(11sat/byte) defaults
but instead were starting from
23sat(1sat/10byte) 46sat(2sat/10byte) 68sat(3sat/10byte)

Sure, it sounds reasonable to me for base fee to adjust in order to reflect increasingly valuable satoshis.
In fact, your account makes me think... what if devs conspire to keep base fee high in exchange for kickbacks from miners?

they dont get kickback from miners, because if they could they would have in last 15 years..
their kickback is make bitcoin expensive and annoying to promote the sandbox unfinished subnetworks that facilitate middlemen fee's for routed payments between institutions that sponsor them
(look into river financial hosting alot of the LN liquidity and sponsoring core devs as one of many examples, DCG previously)

moonie

jr. member

Activity: 30

Merit: 11

Quote from: franky1 on February 12, 2024, 03:15:30 PM

Quote from: lombok on February 12, 2024, 03:06:17 PM

As many of the members above have said, if Bitcoin fees go up and it happens for a very long time, the first thing the devs do is find a way out so that Bitcoin fees go down again. The ups and downs in Bitcoin fees won't happen forever, maybe only for a few days. Improvisations will continue to be made, updates will also continue to be made to improve the system in the Bitcoin Blockchain so that it is able to process more transactions and at low costs.

bitcoin devs knew of the exploit that would allow junk into the blockchain in 2016 when they were designing changes to bitcoin.. they ignored the problem
bitcoin devs knew of the exploit when it started to be abused in 2023(ordinals).. they ignored the problem

bitcoin since 2016 has multiplied from $1k to $70k yet they didnt put in fee bump, dust, fee rate changes to effectivelly allow fee's to even be 10x less to stay within reasonable range
instead they changed fee bump from 1sat/byte(1000sat/kb) to 5sat/byte (5000sat/kb) in 2017
they should have in those years changed to 100sat/kb(1sat/10byte)

so if you are waiting for devs to do something. you have already been waiting 7 years.. so.. when?

ill ask again
anyone else think that the next node release should measure fees in bumps of 1sat per 10byte(100sat/kb)
instead of 5sat per byte(5000sat/kb) bump default, especially when entering the year of the next halving cycle/ATH year

where by if a 226byte tx was
266sat(1sat/byte) then 1356sat (6sat/byte) then 2486sat(11sat/byte) defaults
but instead were starting from
23sat(1sat/10byte) 46sat(2sat/10byte) 68sat(3sat/10byte)

Sure, it sounds reasonable to me for base fee to adjust in order to reflect increasingly valuable satoshis.
In fact, your account makes me think... what if devs conspire to keep base fee high in exchange for kickbacks from miners?

Myleschetty

member

Activity: 1155

Merit: 77

Quote from: moonie on February 12, 2024, 01:40:27 PM

What will happen when only large institutions can afford to use Bitcoin's blockchain, due to rising fees? Won't this centralize the network if most can only trade bitcoin on centralized exchanges?

This won't centralize the network. It will create some level of security for the network if we look at the bright side of it, not the high transaction fee.
Having said that, there are alternative means already created to fend off huge transaction fees which LN is one of them, and it will be nice to adopt the use of it.

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4214

Merit: 4458

Quote from: lombok on February 12, 2024, 03:06:17 PM

As many of the members above have said, if Bitcoin fees go up and it happens for a very long time, the first thing the devs do is find a way out so that Bitcoin fees go down again. The ups and downs in Bitcoin fees won't happen forever, maybe only for a few days. Improvisations will continue to be made, updates will also continue to be made to improve the system in the Bitcoin Blockchain so that it is able to process more transactions and at low costs.

bitcoin devs knew of the exploit that would allow junk into the blockchain in 2016 when they were designing changes to bitcoin.. they ignored the problem
bitcoin devs knew of the exploit when it started to be abused in 2023(ordinals).. they ignored the problem

bitcoin since 2016 has multiplied from $1k to $70k yet they didnt put in fee bump, dust, fee rate changes to effectivelly allow fee's to even be 10x less to stay within reasonable range
instead they changed fee bump from 1sat/byte(1000sat/kb) to 5sat/byte (5000sat/kb) in 2017
they should have in those years changed to 100sat/kb(1sat/10byte)

so if you are waiting for devs to do something. you have already been waiting 7 years.. so.. when?

ill ask again
anyone else think that the next node release should measure fees in bumps of 1sat per 10byte(100sat/kb)
instead of 5sat per byte(5000sat/kb) bump default, especially when entering the year of the next halving cycle/ATH year

where by if a 226byte tx was
266sat(1sat/byte) then 1356sat (6sat/byte) then 2486sat(11sat/byte) defaults
but instead were starting from
23sat(1sat/10byte) 46sat(2sat/10byte) 68sat(3sat/10byte)

Topic: Excessive Bitcoin fees - page 5. (Read 1170 times)