Topic: High transaction fees (Read 655 times)

Yes.. that happened after many months. And also, this one off incident doesn't mean that transactions with a fee of 1 Sat/Byte will get confirmed with surety. Right now fee for high priority transaction is being measured at 2 Sat/Byte and the Mempool is largely empty (less than 80 MB). But once the mining difficulty gets adjusted again, you will see an increase in the fee once more. Anyway, right now I am sending some of the low-priority transactions. Two transactions got confirmed in 5 minutes, after paying a fee of 2.7 Sat/Byte.

Please go fishing with your BSV trolling to altcoin topics.
I can't help but enjoying your perfect timing: you talk about high fees when 2 sat/vByte transactions are mined.
It shows your degree of understanding on what you're talking about.

+

So many things are gettin sold under the name of Bitcoin

but just is not Bitcoin

'high fees' for electronic cash to use is just one of it

It does make sense to me and I get why that kink for dogecoin, from your side, but there's something that is missing from every other altcoin:  None of them has the first mover advantage.

Besides that, I notice a huge marketing manipulation from dogecoin.

44.51% of dogecoins are owned by 10 whales and 20.60% of dogecoins are owned by large investors, which means that 65% of the dogecoins are owned by these entities. I wouldn't call Dogecoin "for the rest of us", it looks rather an investment to me. In fees, it may be better than Bitcoin technically, but is it seemingly better? Nah. There may be better cryptocurrencies in the future, but none of the creators will convince you to switch from the first mover. It's just phenomenally impossible.

You seem more reasonable than the majority.  

Here is why I think the way I do about the non-mining nodes not helping decentralization.

https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/50922/whats-a-sybil-attack

Non-mining nodes can't generate new blocks. They only relay blocks generated by mining nodes.

What make BTC resistant to Sybil is that by segregating the evildoer's mining hashrate from the rest of the network, block propagating would stall without the rest of the network mining nodes hashrate.

All of the protection/security of Bitcoin network is from the Mining Pools and their mining nodes that generate blocks.

All a non-mining nodes does is provide the user with a local receipt copy of all transactions,
Here is an example to clear it up for you,
if I run 500 non-mining nodes from a different IP address is that more decentralized
than running 1 non-mining node. Trick question , because 1 or 500 neither generates blocks, so neither help decentralization.

If I run 10 mining nodes instead of 1 mining node, then the 10 mining nodes do increase decentralization.

If that makes sense to you , great,

if not, Have a Great Day anyway.  

Right now 1 Sat/Byte txs are confirming.

But why it never happens? That even the transaction cost is high but people have no other options to take, they'll have to pay for for it or just leave their coins. But we have to be in mind that this will not be forever (as I believe), sooner or later, the fees will drop down together with the price. It was just now that the price is too high and in correlates to the situation we have. If I have just to transfer a coins worth $50 while I have to pay for $10, I never do that unless if I'm badly need of money.

Average transactions have a size of 100-150 Bytes, so a fee of 11 Sat/Byte translates to around 1200-1600 Satoshis in fee. That comes to around BTC0.000012 - BTC0.000016, and as per the current exchange rates, this amounts to $0.67-$0.90. But the size of your transaction decides everything. If your wallet contains a large number of small-sized transactions, then the size will be larger and therefore the total fee will be higher. And a fee of 2 Sat/Byte would be too low, IMO. It may never get confirmed.

This is the biggest problem faced by a cryptocurrency, if it has a high cost then it will be immediately abandoned by the community. As well as eth, which at that time had very high transactions, they began to switch to bnb smart chain. I hope the project in the future has speed and generosity in transaction fees. it's a lot of fun for bitcoin which is too expensive nowadays.

That is the decentralized nature of bitcoin, therefore we cannot determine the transaction fees we have to adjust them like most people. Sometimes high costs are influenced by the high price of bitcoin as it is today. The solution is, using coins at a low cost, this is why not only is there one cryptocurrency in the world, but we have more than hundreds by having their own superiority.

High transaction fees made my life very tough. I have earned many coins through airdrop or bounties in my wallet which transaction fees are more then their value. Eth transaction fees are out of this world. There is coin called tron what ever the market value would be but the transaction fees is only 1 trx. On  Other side  eth goes in price their fees are ahead of eth value.

and i am one of those people, i don't remember the last time i used bitcoin to buy something or to sell, i always look for other option with lower fees, but Ethereum seems to be doing just fine these days though, but nothing you can do with bitcoin if you have small amounts transactions to make.

High gas fees has made loads of people to avoid the blockchains that are actually related with those gas fees. For example, ethereum has recorded the highest gas fees over the period of time when it came to play. The bitcoin network has also recorded high gas fees but not as much as it has been recorded with the ethereum network. Although it has been slashed by 50% but its quite difficult to see people pay outrageous amounts for gas.

High transaction fees has always been the challenge associated with loads of blockchain starting from the Bitoin which is the flagship of cryptocurrencies and all other blockchains as well. Ethereum so far, has the most charged fees in the history of blockchain as loads of transactions gets to be verified within the same time and therefore attracts high ges fees.

Almost every weekend the transaction fee can drop lower than normal days. I just thought that someone might mind paying high transaction fee if the estimated bitcoin value they had was not that much and a good solution for them would be to wait over the weekend. So far, I am quite used to doing it there. Small transaction may not occur much as long as transaction fee increase, and that's normal. But in my opinion it will not be a problem for those who need fast transaction with a sizable amount of bitcoin.

No you don't. You may be that "nerd" in order to understand their technical background, and LN's is obviously harder to understand, but both of them can be easily used by the averaged person. (After you show him/her how it works)

I agree that being difficult to understand is a disadvantage, since you have to understand everything you're doing on this sector, but sometimes, good stuff require complexity to work. I hope that we both agree that if you transact off-chain it is more practical.

Also, I want to point you that the majority of its users are already unaware of its technical background. They just use it, because they feel it's simple. You shouldn't be forgetting that Bitcoin was invented by those "nerds". It then delved into the market, as always...

Please excuse me! I am reading about LN these days, but it seems I didn't know that. Merited by BlackHatCoiner (1)

Anyway, I don't have much to say here. For the revocation keys and the commitment transactions, I can gently respond that LN is under development. I guess that there will be a solution for those two on improvement proposals. As for losing funds by going offline, I'll have to take it a better look, because I haven't fully got how can that happen.

What exactly will you accomplish if you move your funds to an exchange? Paying even higher fees?

So, all bets are off. 

Not sure if you can sue them, but anyway.

You're lucky that I'm ran out of demerits. Ever heard of Sybil Attack? You are contributing to the harmony of the network if you run a full node. AFAIK, you aren't connecting on the same nodes each time you establish a connection, but a Bitcoin Core expert can correct me. There's that thing called peer discovery that stimulates decentralization.

The fewer the nodes the worse the decentralization.

Just for your information, I ain't a Bitcoin fanboy, but neither a hater. I like seeing things objectively. I don't believe that Bitcoin can be used on a global scale, or in other words:  I don't believe the so called "global adoption", because realistically it can't work.

A few months ago, the price of Bitcoin was just below 10,000. Although the transaction fee was very low at that time, its value is much higher at this time. The transaction fee has now increased 6 times. The volume of transactions has increased a lot with the increase in the price of Bitcoin. Anyone who needs it will no longer move to pay the fee. Rather it will hold more.

Thanks for the Demerits, I shall Cherish them.  


Bitcoin is easy to use , for even the moderate PC person.
LN is the stuff , where you have to be a super nerd to even mess with.
This is not the majority of people.



https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/91211/how-can-someone-lose-funds-in-lightning-network
You lose your partner's revocation keys:
You lose the commitment transactions:
Losing funds from going offline

Random Bugs, not sure if the one below has been fixed yet.
https://bitcoinerx.com/bitcoin/90-of-bitcoins-on-the-lightning-network-could-be-lost-to-attackers-following-current-lightening-implementation-research-says/

Nothing a Super Nerd would worry over, but more than the rest of us will waste time with,  


So, I only leave the amount on the exchange, that I plan on spending.
No one should ever keep all of their eggs in 1 basket.
However if the exchange was reputable , and they lose my coins, I can sue them for damages.
So I can get something back.

If I lose my Funds in LN for any of the reasons mentioned earlier,
who do I sue, No one, it is just gone as a sacrifice to the crypto deity.



I get most bitcoiners believe that,
but to me it is a line of BS.

Artificially limiting BTC onchain network , so that I can claim 12 year old kids are running full nodes and keeping the network less centralized is just plain wrong.
No matter 1 or 1 billion non-mining full nodes, it has zero effect on decentralization, because all they do is relay, they don't validate ,
so this virtue is pure imagination on the part of bitcoiners, kind of you have to believe it to join the bitcoiner cult.
This one confusion of the english language causes so many bitcoiners to repeat the decentralization myth.
Validation only occurs , when a transaction is added to a new block , only mining nodes can add new blocks , so only they validate.
Non-mining nodes, can't add new blocks all they can do is relay blocks, which is why 1 non-mining node is as good as a billion, since all they do is relay blocks.
If this makes no sense to you, no worries just means you are a loyal bitcoiner that does not question blockstream.  




I get you think LN is the solution.
Personally , I don't.

The only way it becomes a solution , is if you pay a bank to credit you with capital on their LN channels, and when finished they let you cash out in fiat. Notice at no point , do you actually buy or sell bitcoin in the above scenario. That is the only way you avoid the overly high transaction fees to open and close LN channels. But theses are just my opinions. In time, all will be apparent.  


FYI:
https://coingeek.com/lightning-strikes-out/

Demerited by BlackHatCoiner (2)

---

There are just so many things I disagree with this message, that I'll have to demerit it. 

Let's take them from the ground up.

Your opinion? That's clearly something personal. It surely is complicated for someone who doesn't know how to use Bitcoin, but someone who does? I'd rather say that he/she just lacks interest in it to say that.

Once you open a channel you're locking your funds on a multi-sig address that requires both signatures to spend from. Every time you transact off-chain, you sign your final balance and you're free to broadcast it whether your node wants it or not. So, how can you lose money if you "don't follow the overly complicated rules"?

But you don't have bitcoins. Your exchange keeps the keys, so they own them.

You do get that the block confirmation time of dogecoin has its downsides, don't you? If the block generation happens that fast, it makes decentralization harder to achieve.

Lightning Network is a solution. It is very practical to transact off-chain for small micro-payments instead of broadcasting them all one-by-one in the block chain. Can you please understand that once you broadcast a transaction it gets saved on hundreds of thousands of computers world wide? You can't really believe that broadcasting a transaction every time you want a coffee is a solution, because this isn't VISA. This is the Bitcoin network and decentralization costs. The Lightning Network is the closest thing we have to accomplish the scaling issue.

---

As for your dogecoin:  Pump it!

Yes,Right,Nowadays it's really getting hard to do small transactions.