Topic: How to give btc users no transaction fees. (Read 1239 times)

It's normal for a transaction to only have two outputs. However, their total has to be a bit lower than the input. This difference goes to the miner as a mining fee. It can be put very low down to 1 sat / vB at current mempool state, but can't be 0. There is a minRelayTxFee=1, which is enforced by nodes and miners. Nodes won't relay a transaction with less than 1 sat in fees and miners won't include it in a block either.

at my point of view
It is possible to send Bitcoins without paying any fee. The easiest way is if your transaction meets the following requirements: The transaction only sends coins to one address, plus the return of change. (No more than two 'out' scripts.).
maybe  i am wrong

To be precise, you need to confirm 2 transaction. But IOTA community often refer it as PoW since it took few seconds to minutes (depending on decice you use). The goal of PoW on Bitcoin and IOTA quite different, where PoW on IOTA is designed to prevent/reduce transaction spam.

I agree that Bitcoin blockchain is growing slower than the decrease of SSD prices, but I don't think it can accomodate for 7 billion users doing transactions daily, except when using unreasonably ginormous blocks, while off-chain solutions do allow for this functionality.

True, IOTA doesn't use blockchain, but DAG (Directed Aligned Graph).


Their definition of free is not spending coin.


I don't perform detailed research, so i don't know. But honestly i don't care since IOTA has single point of failure (see link i mentioned above).

Then instead of a “blockchain”, it’s a “transaction-chain” with individual transactions using Proof of Work as a spam prevention mechanism. That’s not free, and what are the incetives, plus what determines which transaction goes first? How to prevent reorganization of transactions?

I think you should be more thankful of knowledgeable people that have been in the space for years and tell you why a shitcoin is bad. They're protecting you from losing all of your funds in a way.

As alluded to by others, many chains were 'cheap and fast' when adoption was near 0. Bitcoin was like that. Ethereum was like that a few years later. ETH maxis laughed about the idea of LN since 'their coin scaled on-chain cheaply'. Fast-forward to 2021: much larger blockchain size, AND higher fees. Blockchains are always fast and cheap when nobody uses them.

Only real scaling solution is off-chain. Think about it: how many more people have yet to get into Bitcoin in the world? How much would the blockchain (and block size) need to grow if they'd all use on-chain transactions all the time? It will need Gigabyte sized blocks, thus centralizing all nodes and defeating the whole purpose of Bitcoin.
Heck - even on-chain transactions these days partly use 'off-chain technology' when using SegWit to keep nodes easy to run.

However, L2 solutions like Lightning do scale, because everyone can create a channel with anyone else, with a single transaction, then send unlimited amount of transactions over that channel - faster than with any pure blockchain-based solution since there is no 'block time' at all, no confirmations to be awaited. And through routing it gets even better since it limits the amount of channels to usually a hand full to be able to reach most nodes in the network.

I guess you haven't understood what's the scaling problem.

In a decentralized system, where we store transactions into blocks, they have to have a certain size limit. If we had 1 GB of blocks, then we'd also pay zero fees, but only a few mining rigs with technologically upgraded optical fibers could hold out the entire network. I couldn't run my a own node which provides me tons of benefits except if I had few thousands dollars to purchase the required storage. Thus, decentralization becomes a myth as I will need to trust someone else for delivering me the correct chain.

I think he meant “To confirm a transaction”.

That's terrible, because if the same would be done in Bitcoin, then let's assume that block 00000000000000000008e18585a83e67e6fae1029e761cc07a7f20511dbfae1a created 636709588 satoshis. If everyone would need to perform equivalent amount of work in sha256d, then that would mean sending one satoshi would cost producing hash below 000000000001510a12cb3ba29a2d36581f50e80d3e2028757af44a9a0580f188. Doing that with CPU would be extremely difficult and would halt the whole network, because only miners could send any transactions at all.

Have you researched the trade-off?
1. To create/broadcast 1 transaction, you need to perform PoW.
2. IOTA has single point of failure, read https://globalcryptosociety.com/2021/08/iota-cryptocurrency-shuts-down-entire-network-after-wallet-hack/
3. IOTA don't care about cost of running node.

ZERO? Then what kind of protection mechanism does it have to prevent bad actors from spamming the network? Is that shitcoin Proof of Work or Proof of Stake? What kind of incentive stucture does it have to prevent from Sybil Attacks by bad actors?

The problem with people is they don’t read the SIMPLE basics of how a true decentralized cryptocurrency network works. They simply notice some faster shitcoin, and assume it’s better.

Bitcoin also had free transactions, but there was simply no incentive to continue that. If you want to change that, you can pay transaction fees for other people (if you are not a miner) or mine free transactions (if you are a miner). There are no protocol limitations, just default node settings prevent free transactions to avoid spamming the network for free.

Also notice that in the Lightning Network you can create a channel with your friend and have zero fees at all, as long as both nodes agree. You can also create your own public node with no fees.

I think the situation is completely different. Every coin that reached some serious level of adoption, encountered high fees and something we can call "fee market". So, the lack of fees is some sign of being "in the dinosaur age", like "this coin is brand new, so we don't need fees (yet)". But fees are needed in every coin with limited supply. If the basic block reward in a coin will ever reach zero, then miners need any fees to build new blocks. On the other hand, if some coin has unlimited supply, then there could be no fees at all, but then inflation will act as a hidden fee.

Also, transaction batching is possible now (and transaction joining on mempool level may be possible in the future). So, if there are hundreds of transactions and they are all batched, then the whole transaction can be broadcasted for one satoshi per byte, everyone could pay one satoshi for transaction and if there are more users than bytes, then some people could get that batched for free.

Iota has free transactions and very innovative. I guess bitcoin is still in the dinosaur age.

Problem is the admins like to lock threads so no free speach and the people here exist to shoot ideas down which is fine I wouldnt have that any other way but the admins shouldnt be locking threads. They should let a free discussion but they dont.

Will do boss. thanks for your inputs.

Ensure your proposal's straightforwardness. Whatever you have to propose, if you ever come into a valid solution, make sure it is understandable from your readers. Let it be simple and don't mess with advanced terms which may make us understand it falsely.

They don't, but you referred to a punishment from the side of the miners if they choose to not confirm free transactions and I asked you to tell me how will you confirm that they, indeed, do that on purpose and how will you prevent them from filling the block with their free transactions to bypass that requirement.

That does seem to be problematic. I didn't really think of it that way. But you're right. Unless it is easier for them to let other peoples' free transactions be used than their own. That's the only way I could envision it still being possible.

Oh that's a very good question indeed! But look at posting #92. That was a very simple metric. I'm going to experiment with other ones. I'll post here when I get something that I like.  Because I know everyone is really excited about how they can get a free transaction oneday  as long as miners dont cheat too much of course. Because nothing would be worse than a miner that didn't want to play by the rules and let peoples free transactions into a block, I mean how do you even force them to??



Nodes validate blocks according to the consensus rules. They don't punish or reward anyone as far as I'm concerned. Anyhow, it's ok if different nodes have different mempools. Not sure why you have such a big sticking point about that matter.

But, that's not “every so often”. For some people whose transactions will qualify, it'll be “always” and for those whose transactions won't qualify, it'll be “never”. Would you mind writing what are the qualifications for a free transaction, though?

Alright, let's take it from the beginning.

The nodes have to somehow punish the miners who choose to not include free transactions in their block, if there are some, correct? But, for the rest of the nodes, what the miners receive in their mempool is non of their business. They can't know what they've received, because each mempool is considered unique for each node; it's just a place where the unconfirmed transactions are gathered.

Each node chooses their own minimum relay fee policy. One may accept any transaction, but others only those that pay a higher amount than 1000 sats as a fee. Thus, they end up with a different mempools.

Now it's not cheating, because it's not something they have to do. In your system they have to include free transactions, so they can simply reject free transactions from people and create their own free transactions, just to include something. There is no way to set fees by using consensus rules. You can have no fees and then they will be paid in transaction outputs (or even in Lightning Network transactions, maybe even in dollars if that will be convenient for miners). You can have too high fees and then users will switch to another coin or miners will return some fees back to the users to bring them back and bypass stupid rules.

To sum up: you can set fees only on mempool level. You can create some solo miner or some mining pool with different rules, but that's all, there is no way to force everyone to switch into your system, the only possible thing is creating some nodes that will accept lower fees or no fees. For now, if you pay 10 satoshis per byte or more, ViaBTC will include up to 100 transactions in their blocks every hour. In your node, you can offer pushing up to N transactions with no fees (or up to N bytes of such transactions), you can offer some kind of gambling (you can win a free transaction or pay two times more than usual), I can imagine something like that.

Originally I thought it would be nice if people could get free transactions whenever they wanted them but that seemed a bit undoable so I modified the idea that maybe they can only get them every so often. Every so often means they won't be doing them whenever they want to, only when they have utxos that would qualify.