Topic: Just Made a Payment with the New Fees (Read 3452 times)

Free as in freedom?

If you are sending more than 1 btc, a fee of 0.0001 btc at current btc price of around $600 is still very cheap, compared to feed of credit card and fiat wire transfer. Problem is when you are sending 0.01 btc or less

You know that the 25 BTC isn't free either? It's paid for, by every owner of bitcoin, in the form of inflation. Everyone's BTC become worth slightly less with each block. It's as if using a credit card was free, but the government printed a few hundred million dollars each year and gave them to the credit card company.

ah, thank you so much sir,
you have made a drunken middleaged twat feel slightly less lost in this horrible world...

Many mining operations and peers are still running Bitcoin-Qt 0.8.x  Therefore, if you include a fee of less than 0.0001 BTC per kilobyte, you are likely to run into delays in getting the transaction confirmed since many peers won't relay the transaction, and many miners will ignore it.

As more people upgrade to version 0.9.0, transactions with smaller fees will be more likely to be relayed and confirmed.

haven't made a transaction for a while now - used to include a fee of 0.0001 btc ...

so what's the new min. fee ?  0.00001 ?

that's half a cent... ?  not 5 cents...?

had a look on blockchain - all kinds of crazyshit in fees there, ( one tit even sent 0.1btc  fee for little more than that in spend )

so what's the chuffing fee now ?

...my mind is full of unh? and durrrr...

Yes, and that's a good thing.

You do believe that dust spam should have to pay a fee, don't you?



I'd argue that they were more private, not necessarily more secure.

Fortunately, you aren't restricted to one-transaction-per-address by the protocol.

Penny wise, pound foolish? This fixation people have with low or no fees is irrational when the fees are negligible—and actually do support the network. If you want to freely move dust, then perhaps find the right altcoin—but please do so whilst understanding the risks and opportunity cost vis-à-vis bitcoin and what bitcoin is not designed to do. Personally, unless I'm dealing with some of my coins from 2011, I typically substantially increase the suggested tx fee.

you are correct.

I love you all.

Thanks again for explaining.  Mining dynamics are one of the least understood aspects of bitcoin.  
I have to admit that I was a bit confused (no pun intended lol) , as far as the whole
"bitcoin and mining work by consensus", rather than competition.  I'm still not 100% clear
on the parts everyone must agree to (or a fork happens) versus the flexible parts.
Perhaps you can illuminate this distinction further for us.

The fees are nothing to do with mining or the economics of mining.

They were added to make it expensive for someone to attack the network with spam.

See:

https://gist.github.com/gavinandresen/2961409

I'm responding against my better judgement, but I'm worried that noobs might mistake franky's posts for factual information.

In a free market, nobody would use a client that asks for excessive fees. In any case, Bitcoin-QT in fact does not care how much you send or how much you pay in fees. The mintxfee option allows you to pay as much or as little in fees as you want.

ok softcoded (seeing as the software gets updated) EG version 0.1-0.8 came up with a box that demanded a fee, and would not let you transact without a fee

in a true freemarket the bitcoin QT should not be asking for fee's, the bitcoin QT should notcare if its 5ksat or 1million bitcoin that is sent.

bitcoin has too many "features" now that is limiting how people transact
EG imagine a bank account which you want your family to send money to each birthday/christmas or your employer paying you a wage each month, your bank now as a default setting wants to change your bank account number for each transaction received. (sarcasticly thanking LukeJr for that idea)

and now you have hundreds of accounts all with one line in the bank statement..

translation: the wallet.dat growing with each transaction. requiring regular backup and having to input many privkeys into different client apps if you prefer paper backup.

its simply making bitcoins less easy to use and manage for average joe.

i would rather have 1 address being repeatably used as default
where my tx is
vin:1address
vout:1otheraddress
amount:1btc

instead of having to list loads of addresses as the funds are spread. causing the message asking for a fee due to data size..

but it seems a few people are narrow sighted using the vision of miners. and not average joe

expecting certain standard replies
1) if you reply, that the fee only appears if a TX exceeds certain data size, then your simply agreeing that there was some code that was demanding fee's.
2) if you reply fresh addresses are more secure. i think you already argued days ago that 10^160 is strong enough security
3) mintxfee is a voluntary amount over the current rules of datasize.

There are no fees hardcoded in the protocol. 

a free market is where individual businesses can choose what fee's to charge

but having it hard coded into the protocol. is not freemarket as its affects everyone.

You! Dammit, I've been trying to find out for years who keeps telling clueless noobs that Bitcoin transactions were free so that I could punch them in the face, and it was you all along! Do you have any idea how much time I've wasted correcting noobs whom you've been lying to? Do you? *punch* Now you made me hurt my hand. I hope you're happy.

I can see that.  I will avoid wasting my time in the future.  Hopefully others found it more informative.

Greed isn't necessarily bad.  Greed is what drives people to create new companies and services.  Coinbase for example and its investors/backers is taking a risk.  The risk is they will lose everything (including years of hard work) however they (like all companies/startups) take that risk for the potential profits they can secure. 

Now unchecked greed is bad.  The good thing about Bitcoin is it is an open network.  If some miners get to be too greedy, other miners will undercut them.  If some miners are too risky (cutting margins too thin) they will go bankrupt and be replaced by more conservative miners.  That is how open free networks self regulate.   You either believe in free markets or you don't.  If you don't then no system like Bitcoin (or any decentralized system) can ever work, they are doomed to failure from the genesis block. If you believe in free markets then the greed of any individual actor is irrelevant.  They will simply price themselves out of the market.

Looks like you're responding to franky1?

I put him on ignore a long time ago.

Now I remember why.  He isn't able to take a thought to its logical completion.  That makes any attempt to help him understand a complete waste of time.

He's been on this socialist "everyone should get everything for free from the magical resource providing ghost" rant for a long time, and no attempt to explain how the free market handles limited resources has had any success.