I think it will come back some point in the future for this reason.
there's no point in reducing the minimum fee as long as blocks are full.
I see a time coming where blocks are very rarely full because the cost of on-chain transactions (in fiat terms) has become so high as to push the majority to only use off-chain transactions.
Interesting! Considering the current consolidation happens at 3 sat/byte, you could probably consolidate at least everything between 20,000 and 50,000 sats at 1 sat/byte. Make the transactions separate from the higher amounts, and just keep broadcasting until it confirms.
We use a formula to calculate the fee and a percentage of the value of the input. So when the network is busy like it is now and we are sweeping at higher than 1 Sat/byte only higher value deposits are swept. eg
https://btc.com/05255aa61e2ffeebdab7cd3b0899250c4f133a93f09b0b4bbdd0c67a6b981a3750,000 Sats is the limit for a fee of 1 Sat/byte.
I checked
all addresses with less than 50,000 sat. The total balance is 18,088.92659937
BTC. That means FreeBitco.in owns 1.266% of all dust.
In total, 22,918,211 addresses hold less than 50,000 sat. Assuming an even distribution, 1.226% puts you at around 290,000 inputs. This is enough to fill about 43 blocks. Assuming my estimate on the number of addresses is correct: consolidating everything at 1 sat/byte would cost 0.43
BTC, which is only 0.19% of the 229
BTC value.
I'll have to check with wetsuit but I think the even distribution isn't that even. He said the cost would be greater than 5%.Edit:
wetsuit just clarified it. The 5% number was completely wrong, most likely a memory lapse on my part.
The 50,000 Sat limit isn't an absolute because we consolidate 50 deposits at a time (making 51 inputs) and then look at the total fee for the transaction. So looking at example
https://btc.com/2694230cb67a58601b21b8038a1603f4e122a09422c005cf2a07e917bb9b1dbdThere are some at 0.00035399 because the higher ones increase the average.
The transactions are 9,850 Bytes so if they were all 50,000 the total would be 0.025 so 0.00009850 fee means 0.394% of the value would be spent. The limit on deciding to sweep or not is 0.4% of the total transaction value.
The 229 BTC is made up of 1,382,227 UTxOs. So if 50 takes 9,850 bytes that's 197 bytes each meaning 272,298,719 bytes total or minimum cost of 2.72298719 BTC.
And of course implement Segwit for future deposits
That is something I have been keen to do for a long time. The problem is that we have always said all your old deposit addresses will remain valid. We would have to run a new system alongside the old one and thus double our overheads.