Topic: Just what is a FAIR fee to send a Bitcoin transaction? - page 6. (Read 7395 times)

You are correct about the bank fees....but Incorrect about bitcoin.

We will ALWAYS need miners, it is the basis.  Please learn more about Bitcoin.  

@pitham1 What country do you live in? Did you make the transfer to another user in the same banking system, e.g. from POSB Singapore to another POSB Singapore? Otherwise I highly doubt that it's free.

Meanwhile in US:
[wiki]In the United States, domestic wire transfers are governed by Federal Regulation J[5] and by Article 4A of the Uniform Commercial Code.[6] US wire transfers are costly, for example, as of November 2011 the Bank Of America charged $25 to send a wire and $12 to receive one within the U.S. For international transfer, it charged $35–$45 outgoing, $16 incoming[/wiki]

I don't think miners will be necessary after we've mined enough coins (2040 something..). There needs to be dedicated servers for TX verification. How do we fund those servers, that's the next question. Again. the core concept of Bitcoin/Altcoin is about de-centralization, but the network needs to be funded somehow.

More at: http://bitcoinfees.com/ "The fee, when it is required, is usually worth less than 40 US cents.". "If you can wait for 10 hours, there will be no transaction fee".

IMHO 10 mBTC for TX fee is still considered super cheap as compared to other service providers.

... o.O You know, advertising fees could be an answer to offsetting the cost burden of transmitting blocks and transactions in queue. Some kind of score system could be come up with... maybe each transaction transmitted adds a score of 1, where each block transmitted adds a score of 250, and the transmitting node can include some kind of standardized referral or CPM protocol, where Core or similar client software automatically generates an address specifically for this (or the user could manually assign which address they want their coins).

The receiving client keeps track of this and uses the scores for a raffled ad rotation system. The receivers' local client uses the user's unique ID for use in any compliant ad server. The receiver, then, can use this list and use the ad server to dedicate an ad slot on their platform (website, app, whatever) to paying back people sending him data.

It adds a lot of overhead and sounds like a real pain in the ass to implement, and it relies on people being nice, but I never even thought it was possible to pay transmitters, before. Sounds really complicated (and would probably need to be partially centralized so it isn't BFL/Pirateat40/BitcoinTrader spam 24/7), but clients could handle this all with default settings and downloading a kind of add-on which transmits the extra data. The rest'd be on the major service providers.

Banks have a lot of other avenues for earning income, apart from transaction fees.
As the block reward reduces over the years, transaction fees will become the main source of income for miners.

1 cent for every 2 dollars, that's reasonable - fyi 40K requires a 200 dollar fee.

Something between $0.01 - $0.05 is perfect imho (in current conditions). If fees are too high, that would kill the small tx (low value purchases, donations, tips etc) and would make BTC less competitive and less appealing comparing to cc, paypal and others.

Then again, fees need to be high enough to compensate for mining costs (when block rewards become insignificant). So it's all about balance.

Flexible fees may also be a good idea, i.e. equivalent of $0.005 for micro tx (up to $5?), $0.05 for tx of $5-$500 and $0.50 for >$500. Don't think that's possible to implement tho.

Generally speaking the TX fees have gone to the miners since the block reward was halved from 50 BTC to 25 BTC. The only real exception to this rule are the PPS pool operators however the miners are getting a huge advantage of not having to deal with pool variance (the attractiveness of running a miner on a PPS - pay per share - pool/payout system will decrease over time as block subsidies make up a less percentage of total block rewards and TX fees make up larger parts of block reward)

Pool operators share their reward with everybody that helped solve the block, they may charge a slight fee off of that block. TX fees, generally, also go to pool operators.

Herp a derp. My bad. Really? It's that much?

you're off by a decimal place bro

3600*385=$138.6k

if very small fixed fees won't support the network in the future, maybe percentage based fees will, such as 0.1%.  Today the network gives about 1.4 million dollars daily in rewards . If the network grew to the point where 1.4 billion dollars worth was changing hands daily, a 0.1% fee would provide that same 1.4 million dollars for security.

The total transaction fees has been on a declining trend.

https://blockchain.info/charts/transaction-fees

I guess once the block reward halves, transaction fees will become more important.

I think this is a very complex question, mainly because the majority of the income for miners is from block subsidies. The miners need to be able to pay their electric costs at the very minimum and the total TX fees + the block subsidies need to cover this. If the market is not able to support high enough transaction fees then the difficulty will decrease and if it decreases enough then the network will not be secure.

I would say that some amount that will allow the miners to continue to pay for electricity + some profit at a difficulty that keeps the network sufficiently secure.

Satoshi said that no tx needs a fee unless the amount you are sending out is equal to or above 200x the largest transaction you have received.

I think the should 5 cents / less (5k satoshi / less)
And all tx must have fee


I disagree with your opinion, who will mine if the diff. very high & tx fee is very low

I voted five cents there is thousands of transactions so it's ok, it's cheap but also an incentive to the miners.

I chose 50 cents - this is of course under the idea that btc is worth 2K or more 

It's hard to say. I am not one of the free-for-all fraction, and miners need to cover their costs.

However, we've got to compete with the traditional banking system that can fund their activities via other, non transaction-based fees (i.e., bank account fees). For example, wire transfers in all of Europe are for free (and take only 1-2 days, so bitcoin's advantage in Europe is relatively low when compared to the US).

So I guess the answer is "as low as possible", which would incur that the mining sector shrinks in size.

This is really the only correct answer. If you pay less then what the market will "allow" then you are essentially cheating the service provider (the miners) (you are actually probably taking advantage of the fact that they are in need of money) and if you pay more then you are paying an inflated price.