Topic: High fees are not bitcoin's destinty - page 2. (Read 420 times)

But the maximum of Bitcoin TPS is only 7, so if the block size is increased, it will not change anything. People are still forced to pay higher fees, if not their transactions will stuck in limbo.

I feel like ordinals spam should be discussed with miners as they're oppositions against the users.

Why the developers need to spend their time for unnecessary problem, if Ordinals isn't exist in the first place, many developers will no need to think about this and find the solution.

I see that the positive side of Ordinal NFTs is that they have given us a practical idea of the problems that the Bitcoin network will suffer in the event of global adoption, and this will push the Bitcoin community to search for solutions that must be developed to eliminate this highly likely problem in the future.

The Bitcoin network is still in its infancy, and as global adoption expands in the future, we will certainly face these problems, so it is best to look for solutions to these potential problems now.

Another good aspect is that miners will no longer have to fear for the future of mining due to rewards being halved every four years. They now see that this problem can be solved by increasing transactions on the network.

@OP, so using ordinal cheat code makes our transactions cheaper? I wonder why aren't we using the same trick and insert our ACTUAL BITCOINS inside the ordinal "cheating space" as a trojan horse and fool the scammers miners to include our transactions faster? If you check the last 500 blocks you can see how these scammers are sliding dust amounts with normal and even low fees in bulk into the blocks. They are so desperate at scamming the community that they don't even care about the date and time of other transactions to include older TXs first instead of adding 2000 dust trash with the same fee rate as the old TXs waiting in mempool.

But they haven't realized that if there are no users, their attempt at "keeping the network safe" is futile, IMO we need something in place to keep us safe from miners, wait...... I have an idea! How about we ask everyone we see randomly on the streets to come and help us by making a "development team"? That way we can be assured someone at least has our interest in mind which we can then depend on them for anything coming our way. Oh wait someone is passing by, lemme ask him if he is willing to be a dev,...... well it was a burglar trying to empty the neighbor's house, which now when I think about it, he is more decent and eligible to represent us, since he stabs from behind and in the dark, while cough some people cough, are looking us right in the eyes smiling with their knives being on display online for the world to see. 😅

We aren't that far from really low rewards, like 0.4 BTC per block. Will the price be 8 times higher by that time? It's easy to say "yes" if you extrapolate the past performance, but extrapolating the past performance is wrong, there is no asset in this world that grows at the same rate forever. Sooner or later Bitcoin's growth will slow down and will stop compensating for the halvenings. So the effect of lower block reward on mining will happen in our lifetime. The reward will be zero in 2140 but it will become very low way before that.

To solve the network congestion and address the high transaction fee issue, the only solution is for the Bitcoin network to scale.  There are also some solution that uses layer 2 protocol such as lightning network.

The development of Bitcoin is yet final, since it is a technology, the developer will find way to solve the scalability problem of Bitcoin.  I am also one of those that believe that it is not destiny of Bitcoin to have high transaction fee.  It counters the goal of Bitcoin to be adopted by people and use as cheaper alternative  method of payment.

I think this ordinal spam can be taken as a challenge for developers to solve the scalability issue of Bitcoin.  We might take this as the possible occurrence in the future when the adoption of Bitcoin is high enough that the volume of transaction is 10x to 100x larger than the current normal volume of transaction.

Regardless whether these ordinal have a discounted tx fee or not, the main issue is that the current setup of Bitcoin network scalability is not ready for ordinals spam when the taproot upgrade is implemented.

At the moment they do. Ordinals are still new, and new conditions surrounding them (like miner opt in/out of confirming those transactions) could still be made. Similarly, miners could eventually decide it is best to exclude then for the sake of network activity.

To directly address the discount, they still pay a higher fee overall. Even though sats per vbyte is actually lower, the transaction size itself in bytes is higher, so they are still paying more. We should remember that as time goes by.

I don't think this a permanent issue in any case...I personally think ordinals are just a way for miners to:
- Maximize fees over the short to mid term
- Benchmark the network's revenue generating capability conservatively with these transactions over normal transactions.

Side note kind of relating to the above, I think it's also quite convenient that the ordinal spam started around this positive sentiment, and the positive sentiment on the rise at the start of the year.

This is not true. Ordinal inscriptions have a comparative advantage to other types of transactions. For the amount of space they take on-chain, they pay less actual sats/vByte.
This is very easy to demonstrate. For instance, this following transaction should have paid ~300 USD in fees but instead was given a 75% discount due to exploiting certain Taproot and SegWit features that are overutilized to make ordinal transactions much cheaper comparatively to normal transactions.
https://mempool.space/tx/77e996de08c48ed282a7b8bc88ca199712a15fa68babb10a0b3ee760674cf21b

If it weren't for these discounts we'd certainly be having much less spam from Ordinal NFTs and BRC-20 tokens.

Before I address the rest of the topic, let me start by addressing:



The disincentive already exists, the fee to mint ordinals are already much higher than that of a standard Bitcoin transaction.


The fees already adjust appropriately based on the byte size of a transaction. 


Miners already have the option to opt out of including ordinals/nfts in blocks if they'd like to.


This argument has already been made before hence BCH and the other spin offs of BTC. There's no need to revive this debate.



The way Bitcoin is heading is the intersection of Block Rewards with Fees. Before it was less about fees and more about the price vs. Block reward...but as we've travelled, fees have become more of a factor. If the Bitcoin network is not active enough to make up the difference in the block reward halving every 4 years, miners won't find it profitable and will stop mining.

This halving is the first one where:
- Miners do not have enough control of the market to help push toward profitable blocks post-halving.
- The reward halving is less, and network fees will be more of a determinant of mining profitability than before.

Does it mean fees will increase? Maybe. As at the end of the day, more network activity means higher pressure on the network, meaning higher fees.

However you are right about one thing, ordinals are putting a lot of pressure on the network. I have a feeling that this is intentional though.

I just wanted to make a short post about the differing opinions that there exist about bitcoin's future.
Some people seem to believe that it's bitcoin's fate to have high fees. That the limited block space along with increasing demand will combine to replace block rewards, continuing to provide miner incentives to keep the network secure.

Well, for one, we're far from bitcoin having block rewards that are near zero. So saying that bitcoin having high fees is already meeting its destiny is at the very least a misrepresentation of what's happening.

The thing is, bitcoin's fees are currently up due to NFT and tokens unrelated to BTC trying to be included in the blockchain.
So it's not like bitcoin is facing an unavoidable destiny right now.

There ARE ways that could potentially help with the spam that's causing the blockchain bloat. To name a few:
1. Disincentivizing on-chain NFTs and tokens creations by removing their fee discounts wherever possible.
2. Increasing fees for using certain features.
3. Transaction filtering to invalidate transactions that are with certainty used for putting tokens on-chain.
4. Making block space bigger.

Some of these, or even a combination of the above could easy the strain on the blockchain caused by transactions that aren't actually done to transact value with BTC.
And to address potential concerns about increasing the space for transactions in blocks, one must understand economics.
More transaction space resulting in lower fees doesn't mean that there will be no incentive to protect the network.
Lower fees will result to more demand to create transactions which will in turn balance out to total transaction fees potentially even being higher after an equilibrium is reached.  


Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_equilibrium