How low transactions fees could go? - page 2.

jtipt

hero member

Activity: 1050

Merit: 529

Quote from: jmiro1 on February 27, 2018, 01:13:42 PM

I agree, I also believe 1 satoshi/byte is the least transactions fees possible. But situations might not go that far.

Last week someone got a 0.65 sat/byte fee transaction confirm in the first block. And it's absolutely possible to even send 0 fees transactions, but no miner will include that transaction.

Quote from: J_CCreate on February 28, 2018, 04:10:20 AM

If Lightning will be implemented, the fees will be extremely low. Even lower than it is now.

off chain transactions will help with the fees but they aren't a viable option to transact huge amount, AFAIK a lighting channel has a limit of maximum BTC as well as a transaction also has a maximum limit for now.
Because of this larger amounts of BTC will still be transacted on chain and eventually the fess can increase.

J_CCreate

copper member

Activity: 224

Merit: 0

If Lightning will be implemented, the fees will be extremely low. Even lower than it is now.

Thirdspace

hero member

Activity: 1232

Merit: 738

Mixing reinvented for your privacy | chipmixer.com

Quote from: MadGamer on February 27, 2018, 08:26:20 AM

I believe 1 satoshi/byte is the lowest fee/unit to use.

well we used to be able to send with 0 fee Grin

but those days is over, I think all miners only accept min 1s/B fee now.

Quote from: HeRetiK on February 27, 2018, 09:24:33 AM

Quote from: MadGamer on February 27, 2018, 08:26:20 AM

If we ever go to 100% (or anything near it) and fees reach their minimum, why there would be any need for Schnorr, Bulletproofs or any other proposal that could decrease transactions size?

Because it won't stay that way and the transaction count that needs to be handled is only going to grow.

Quote from: ahmad21 on February 27, 2018, 02:23:30 PM

I think instead of coming up with the negatives we must think about positives. With fees going down to 1sat/byte I think the scaling problems will almost disappear for once.

the scaling problems will never disappear as easy as that.
I agree with HeRetiK the transaction counts will only grow with time
it just that in time like this, for whatever reasons there are only small number of transactions being made
the more users joining the network, the more bitcoin adoptions, the more frequent users make payments and so on
thus more transactions will be made... therefore the scaling problems will always exist when bitcoin usage increases

"If we ever go to 100% (or anything near it) and fees reach their minimum"
when we are at 100% segwit txs, min fees reached and low tx counts, that means the network is at lowest level of scaling problems
what happen if 100% segwit transactions but the number of transactions multiplied 10x times
because there 5x new users and each make 2 transactions constantly every day? network load will increase drastically!
then there will be competition for transactions inclusion in block followed by increase of transaction fee
you need to take in the # of transactions and bitcoin popularity when talking about scaling problems

ahmad21

sr. member

Activity: 672

Merit: 271

I think instead of coming up with the negatives we must think about positives. With fees going down to 1sat/byte I think the scaling problems will almost disappear for once. I think its quite an achievement if you see that despite of such a huge network load bitcoin has been able to cope up with the load. With fees the transaction time has also fallen down. Needless to say that it cannot be reduced than 10 minutes due to its inherent problem but still 10 minutes is very much usable. With more and more adoption will surely will see some new advancements coming our way.

jmiro1

member

Activity: 235

Merit: 11

I agree, I also believe 1 satoshi/byte is the least transactions fees possible. But situations might not go that far.

13abyknight

sr. member

Activity: 602

Merit: 252

Quote from: MadGamer on February 27, 2018, 08:26:20 AM

why there would be any need for Schnorr, Bulletproofs or any other proposal that could decrease transactions size?

Transaction size is also a major factor contributing towards transaction fees. With multiple inputs and outputs in a single transaction, the transaction obviously shoots up in size, and if optimal fees would be like it was a month ago, (>500 satoshis/byte) problematic times of long confirmation times would come back sooner or later. Since nobody wishes to live those nightmares again, proposals to decrease transaction size should be considered even amidst presence of Segwit and Lightning Network.

krishnapramod

legendary

Activity: 1470

Merit: 1079

Why would there be any need is based on the assumption that the transactional volume wouldn't increase in future. If right now, Bitcoin network had the transactional demand as in December and with 20% Segwit adoption, the fees wouldn't be anywhere near 1 Sat/byte. Segwit is just the first step towards implementing a lot of scalability innovations. Schnorr signatures is a scability implementation while confidential transactions/Bulletproofs is privacy-centric.

HeRetiK

legendary

Activity: 3122

Merit: 2178

Playgram - The Telegram Casino

Quote from: MadGamer on February 27, 2018, 08:26:20 AM

If we ever go to 100% (or anything near it) and fees reach their minimum, why there would be any need for Schnorr, Bulletproofs or any other proposal that could decrease transactions size?

Because it won't stay that way and the transaction count that needs to be handled is only going to grow.

Even with off-chain 2nd layer scaling solutions in place we need to utilize what little blockchain space we have as best as we can. Apart from improving Bitcoin's scalability both approaches would also help improve Bitcoin's privacy -- Schnorr signatures are beneficial for CoinJoin and Bulletproofs allows sending hidden transaction amounts.

MadGamer

legendary

Activity: 1568

Merit: 1031

I believe 1 satoshi/byte is the lowest fee/unit to use. If that's indeed the case and we didn't even reach reach 20% SegWit transactions - according to SegWit.party, transactions are currently going with 1sat/byte (after a few blocks). If we ever go to 100% (or anything near it) and fees reach their minimum, why there would be any need for Schnorr, Bulletproofs or any other proposal that could decrease transactions size?

Topic: How low transactions fees could go? - page 2. (Read 437 times)