Topic: Fees have been low after Segwit's growing adoption. Thanks Segwit. (Read 583 times)

What "stats" are you looking for? That the block sizes are over 1mb and the fees are below normal levels. I can send a Segwit transaction paying for a fee if two satoshis per byte and it will confirm in 30 minutes.


Gaslighting again. Beware of his lies and manipulation, newbies.


It is a malleability fix and opens the road to more "updates" that are inclusive through soft forks, like Schnorr.

If Segwit was not "marketed" as a scalability solution, but only as a malleability fix, it might have activated within three months in my opinion.


Then he will throw one long post composing of "technical" terms that later we'll find out that did not make sense. I will call it Memefication.

Its a good thing to see that fees have become relatively low due to segwit as you have said but what also contributed to the low transactions fees is also the down market because once the bull market returned the fee will still get hick again and until then let keep enjoying the moment doing our normal transactions with low fees.

yea, funny part though.
the timing of the spam was when core needed bips activated and was PR campaigning the bip will solve the spam and fee issue.
the spam coincidently stopped once cor got the bips they wanted..
wait not a coincidence once you do data analysis and found out which merchants, mining pools and mixers were doing it and then noticing who was affiliated with such mixers, pools and merchants

(thats old news by the way. and has been myth busted.. so no point windfury is there reason for you to conjure up that old PR script and try to pretend/twist the narrative back into the myth of it not being cor intention)

another funny part. segwits mandatory chain split happened first. bitcoincash didnt even make a block until hours later. .. yep segwit supporters actually used the evidence that cash couldnt make a block to activate cash until hours later as a PR campaign in itself.. also evidence that segwit caused split can actually be found by looking at block data.

..
dang windfury. your PR scripts someone hands you are so out of date and bust.
maybe best to check your sources before repeating the propaganda. as its becoming too obvious now.

your just repeating old 1-3year stuff

windfury has gone way overboard advertising segwit and LN lately. im starting to wonder why. especially with lack of stats to back it up

the reality is this
1. fees now are MORE then they were when segwit was conjured up as a solution that could lower fee's. so its not actually lowered fee's. it just hiked them up pre segwit and then offered just a modest discount to bribe people to use segwit (ven hough after discount fees are still higher)
by this i mean in 2015 when blocks were approaching 1mb limit the fee's were cheaper before segwit than fees are now even when blocks now are not full

2. blocks are not full, not due to segwit solving anything, but because there are less transactions per block.
yes less people are using bitcoin

3. i know he will spin around and say mor % are using segwit. but if you start selling 2500 banana's where 0% are green
and then start selling 1500 banana's and of the 1500 banana's 10-40% are green.
that does not mean that they are selling 250-1000 green bananas(using old normal utility)
that does not mean that they are selling 2750-3500 bananas

they are only selling 150-600 green banana.. meanwhile 1000 people stopped buying bananas altogther because the price to even touch a banana has gone up

.. all it takes is a good look at the statistics can show this

he is trying to say the unconfirmed tx is due to more transactions and more than 1mb
yet. all he is showing is unconfirmed transaction count.. but that has NOTHING to do with segwit
.. when you look at the block data there are LESS data per block
https://www.blockchain.com/charts/avg-block-size?timespan=2years
and less transactions in general
https://i.imgur.com/hYz5NuG.png

because less people are transacting. and yet FEE's are HIGHER than 2015

now then
bitcoin actually was planned to REDUCE min fee/min dust/min relay when btc price rises.
EG when prices went from $600 to $6k or $100 to $1k . the decimal of min fee/min dust/min relay SHOULD HAVE dropped to counter deflation.

 but the group pushing to promote segwit actually pushed UP the min fee, to cause a fee war and then spam the network to get the feature they wanted.
and since then the fee's are stil higher than before segwit.

lets put it into context
even if segwit was not adopted.. if the btc core crew reduced the min fee by 1decimal to counter the BTC price.when BTC went from ~$600 to ~$6000...
then based on transaction counts fee's would have been the same as 2015

but what happened though. is core DID NOT reduce the min fee by 1 decimal to counter the btc price rise. but they also done their witness scale factor trick

this is why it feels like data for data. price equilibrium makes it a 40x fee hike compared to 2015
hense why the half penny of the past is now ~$0.20 average at best. which segwit then trickery gives segwit a $0.05 fee as the bribe to use segwit.
even though thats still 10x more then 2015 of similar data position.

im guessing he may rebutt about the data of a segwit transaction....
well, take a transaction of lets say 2-in 2out of full validation data of a transaction, both legacy and segwit
you will find segwit actually uses more bytes than with legacy



maybe its time windfury done some research rather than just PR
i would give windfury the benefit of doubt that he simply was not around in 2015 to know what really went on in the community. but seeing his latest efforts of PR. im starting to doubt that as his reasons for promoting segwit, even when the real stats show overwise.
(fee total $ per day 2015 $*k 2018 $***k even though prices only went up 10x(yea he cant even twist it into blaming deflation(pricerise) because i mentioned above  ))

Currently due to lower demand the fees are also lower but as soon as like last year if it reaches the peak fees will rise to great extent and much more than what it is at present. Depending upon the demand and transfer that take place the fees are applicable.

Probably. But segwit is just a start. And compared to when we don't have avtivated segwit, the fees right now are much more acceptable than before. We wouldn't know yet if the fees will double if btc makes another rally but definitely segwit made a difference.

I wouldn't be so sure of that. Yes, SegWit makes spamming more expensive overall, but it's not that the dirty tricks the big block camp will come up with won't be having a significant impact anymore.

Last year Bitmain's pools have frequently been mining empty blocks just to troll Bitcoin, and by doing that they knowingly said goodbye to $50-$100k in fees alone! Does that sound like they care much about money?

Another thing is that the fees they spend on sustaining spam attacks largely flow back into their pockets, so what's there to lose? They don't mind spending money on marketing Bcash at cost of Bitcoin.

 

Thanks for creating this topic ,fees are low ,accept accepted but its not effective as expected ,what will happen if bitcoin doubles in price ? The fee will skyrocket as well ,we still need better transaction fix for bitcoin

It is just very bad that people that Bitcoin made, that none would have heard about them are the one holding the development and the progress of Bitcoin back, miners, investors and developers. Now I do understand this quote that "we can accomplish anything provided we do not care who get the credit" this power struggle and greed need to stop

The flooding was done on Legacy Bitcoin, not on SegWit. I would like to see the spammers trying to replicate that attack on SegWit, because that is going to cost them a arm and a leg and my guess is that it will hardly have any impact at all. 

I made use of the opportunity to shift all my coins onto SegWit, while the network is uncongested and the fees are low, so I am geared up and ready to go, for the next push. 

Let the games begin!

Haha. Yes, it's below normal.

I don't think mempool spammers are the main obstacle we'll be facing, but miners themselves. Last year the main source of network congestion was caused by miners moving insane amounts of hashpower from BTC to BCH, then back to BTC, then again to BCH, etc. These hashpower movements slow down block times to such degree, that it automatically causes more network congestion.

At peak the average block times were pushed to over 15 minutes instead of the regular 10 minutes.