Not enough profits with 25 BTC reward to include more tx's?

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4424

Merit: 4794

Quote from: chatterhead on November 08, 2013, 08:22:25 PM

I am new to BTC , i m not worried about losing the coin, but I transfer the coin for a reason and the person on the receiving end does not like the delay at all, which everyone can understand.
I hope there is way we can push the transaction thru -with a fee of course.
But currently there isn't such option...

In separate thread I was told blockchain client would eventually forgets about the transaction at all? Now I am worried whether I will see my BTC again..

getting a confirmation is normally only needed between 2 people who do not fully trust each other, this is to make sure the sender does not send the coin and then also send the exact same balance back to himself, causing the amount sent to the other party becoming void.

if you are doing a transaction to a friend and he knows you well enough to not cheat him, or at least knows you well enough to know where to go to slap you across the face with a wet fish if you did cheat him. then you wont have to worry about confirmations

chatterhead

newbie

Activity: 21

Merit: 0

I am new to BTC , i m not worried about losing the coin, but I transfer the coin for a reason and the person on the receiving end does not like the delay at all, which everyone can understand.
I hope there is way we can push the transaction thru -with a fee of course.
But currently there isn't such option...

In separate thread I was told blockchain client would eventually forgets about the transaction at all? Now I am worried whether I will see my BTC again..

Peter R

legendary

Activity: 1162

Merit: 1007

Quote from: CIYAM on November 08, 2013, 08:44:08 AM

Apart from the problem of recently slow block discovery times, on average the new blocks are only around 200K (containing around 200-300 tx's) despite a large queue of unconfirmed transactions.

As BTC is at record highs is it not possible for miners to be a little more generous and include more tx's (so the blocks are closer to the 1MB limit)?

Many are now waiting days for their first confirmation and it certainly doesn't look good for talking about scaling (if we want to keep saying zero or little fees - and I am not talking about dust or invalid transactions due to no fees when the spec requires them).

At least if there were some way to "add a fee" to an existing tx one could get it to process but instead now if you didn't set your client to include a mandatory fee you just wait, and wait, and wait.

Sad

I think your idea is an excellent one, CIYAM.

I learned yesterday while doing some "banking" that the blockchain.info app doesn't include fees when they are not strictly required (despite selecting the "generous fee" setting). I have a single >1 BTC unconfirmed transaction that is now almost 24h old (all my transactions with fees went through immediately). This would spook someone new to bitcoin if they thought something got screwed up and thought that now those coins may be lost.

So I think your idea is great, but it would also be good if all the wallet software out there was more proactive in ensuring the default settings will "get the job done."

TTBit

legendary

Activity: 1137

Merit: 1001

Quote from: payb.tc on November 08, 2013, 09:32:37 AM

an easier method for less advanced users would be to simply let the original 'free' transaction go through, but for a seperate payment to the pool.

(i.e. you pay the pool 0.001 btc and tell them which free tx you want them to include in their next block)

that way novices don't have to figure out how to resend a transaction (which as far as I know, bitcoin-qt won't allow)

Taking the fees out of the tx itself would also allow for pool subscriptions. I pay 0.01 to "BTC Miner" and get a set amount of transactions. It would allow for economies of scale, i.e. bit-pay could get a better rate per tx than the guy that processes 1 per month. Dust transaction sites would have a different agreement.

edit: sites like btc guild could also "guarantee" transaction times (say 60 minutes or your tx fee back) based on their hashing power relative to the network.

CIYAM

legendary

Activity: 1890

Merit: 1086

Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer

Quote from: DannyHamilton on November 08, 2013, 11:11:33 AM

An echo?

Must have missed that amongst the other replies - but yes same point.

IsaacGoldbourne

member

Activity: 112

Merit: 10

Looking to start various enterprises

Quote from: CIYAM on November 08, 2013, 10:24:51 AM

Quote from: Barek on November 08, 2013, 10:11:52 AM

Are those no-fee transactions that get ignored?

Because the minimum fee is what now? 0.0001 btc? I would call that little.

It's mostly no-fee transactions - but understand the protocol does *not* require a fee depending upon the size of the TX and the age of it's UTXO's (so if you've set your bitcoin-qt client to not pay any mandatory fee then it won't unless a fee is *required*).

Quote from: Barek on November 08, 2013, 10:11:52 AM

Where can you see the transaction queue and the unconfirmed transactions?

You can get this info from blockchain.info here http://blockchain.info/unconfirmed-transactions (currently nearly 3000) and the beeping of the confirmations may make that link more than a bit annoying (they should probably drop that *feature* from that page).

I accidentally forgot to attach a fee. Wow.
https://blockchain.info/tx/da4ee56063e5ed03d957090c6b12f0490efbc67e7c5b908d0ca82ac3e8692eb3

DannyHamilton

legendary

Activity: 3472

Merit: 4801

Quote from: CIYAM on November 08, 2013, 11:09:26 AM

There is no warning (assuming that there is no *required* fee) using bitcoin-qt.

An echo?

Quote from: DannyHamilton on November 08, 2013, 11:08:58 AM

Even so, the reference client, Bitcoin-Qt, defaults to no fee if the fee isn't required for spam filtering.
- snip -
there are many transactions that are being created without a fee and without a warning to the user

CIYAM

legendary

Activity: 1890

Merit: 1086

Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer

Quote from: Barek on November 08, 2013, 11:05:51 AM

I understand what you mean. Agreed, a way to hurry transactions would be nice.

Just to help me understand. Isn't the default setting the inclusion of the fee? So a sender would actively chose not to include it, probably followed by a warning about the consequences. In that case, I would count the waiting as a learning experience.

There is no warning (assuming that there is no *required* fee) using bitcoin-qt.

DannyHamilton

legendary

Activity: 3472

Merit: 4801

Quote from: Barek on November 08, 2013, 11:05:51 AM

I understand what you mean. Agreed, a way to hurry transactions would be nice.

Just to help me understand. Isn't the default setting the inclusion of the fee? So a sender would actively chose not to include it, probably followed by a warning about the consequences. In that case, I would count the waiting as a learning experience.

It depends on the wallet they are using. Some wallets are better about encouraging a required fee than others.

Even so, the reference client, Bitcoin-Qt, defaults to no fee if the fee isn't required for spam filtering. These transactions are relayed, but can still be queued up behind fee paying transactions resulting in extended confirmation times with no warning to the user at all. As I understand it the next version of Bitcoin-Qt should be better about suggesting fees, but for now there are many transactions that are being created without a fee and without a warning to the user.

Barek

full member

Activity: 168

Merit: 100

I understand what you mean. Agreed, a way to hurry transactions would be nice.

Just to help me understand. Isn't the default setting the inclusion of the fee? So a sender would actively chose not to include it, probably followed by a warning about the consequences. In that case, I would count the waiting as a learning experience.

DannyHamilton

legendary

Activity: 3472

Merit: 4801

Quote from: Barek on November 08, 2013, 10:56:18 AM

Quote from: DannyHamilton on November 08, 2013, 10:49:02 AM

The great thing about his solution, is that it allows the receiver of the transaction pay the fee if they want to.

Seems complicated. The sender could just deduct it from the sent amount?

Sure. The problem is if the sender didn't realize this and has already sent the transaction. Why should the receiver have to suffer from the sender's mistake. The solution suggested would allow the receiver to receive the bitcoins quickly even if the sender screws up.

Quote from: Barek on November 08, 2013, 10:56:18 AM

Besides, we are talking about fewer than 5 cents here.

Which is why many receivers and/or senders might be willing to pay the fee if there was a method to do so once they realized the mistake.

Barek

full member

Activity: 168

Merit: 100

Quote from: DannyHamilton on November 08, 2013, 10:49:02 AM

The great thing about his solution, is that it allows the receiver of the transaction pay the fee if they want to.

Seems complicated. The sender could just deduct it from the sent amount?

Besides, we are talking about fewer than 5 cents here.

DannyHamilton

legendary

Activity: 3472

Merit: 4801

Quote from: payb.tc on November 08, 2013, 09:32:37 AM

an easier method for less advanced users would be to simply let the original 'free' transaction go through, but for a seperate payment to the pool.

(i.e. you pay the pool 0.001 btc and tell them which free tx you want them to include in their next block)

that way novices don't have to figure out how to resend a transaction (which as far as I know, bitcoin-qt won't allow)

Great idea. I'd love to see the largest pools implement this. I'd definitely use it. The great thing about his solution, is that it allows the receiver of the transaction pay the fee if they want to.

Barek

full member

Activity: 168

Merit: 100

Quote from: CIYAM on November 08, 2013, 10:24:51 AM

It's mostly no-fee transactions - but understand the protocol does *not* require a fee depending upon the size of the TX and the age of it's UTXO's (so if you've set your bitcoin-qt client to not pay any mandatory fee then it won't unless a fee is *required*).

To my understanding the transactions will eventually be included because the priority is a function of wait time? I can understand the miners. They eventually have to live on fees, so it is in their interest to train the users to include at least a tiny one.

Quote from: CIYAM on November 08, 2013, 10:24:51 AM

You can get this info from blockchain.info here http://blockchain.info/unconfirmed-transactions (currently nearly 3000) and the beeping of the confirmations may make that link more than a bit annoying (they should probably drop that *feature* from that page).

Thanks, I missed that. You can disable the sound by clicking the speaker icon.

CIYAM

legendary

Activity: 1890

Merit: 1086

Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer

Quote from: deuce22 on November 08, 2013, 10:31:06 AM

is this mean bitcoin will be useless ? if no one are mining bitcoin are useless

Mining is happening - the problem is simply the delay of low (and no) fee transactions (which is basically needless if the miners would put in more low or no fee paying tx's into their blocks - we can't force them though which is why the suggestion to be able to "add a fee").

deuce22

member

Activity: 70

Merit: 10

is this mean bitcoin will be useless ? if no one are mining bitcoin are useless

greyhawk

hero member

Activity: 952

Merit: 1009

Quote from: CIYAM on November 08, 2013, 08:44:08 AM

As BTC is at record highs is it not possible for miners to be a little more generous and include more tx's (so the blocks are closer to the 1MB limit)?

Generous? I ask you: What is the difference between a man and a parasite? A man builds. A parasite asks 'Where is my share?'

CIYAM

legendary

Activity: 1890

Merit: 1086

Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer

Quote from: Barek on November 08, 2013, 10:11:52 AM

Are those no-fee transactions that get ignored?

Because the minimum fee is what now? 0.0001 btc? I would call that little.

It's mostly no-fee transactions - but understand the protocol does *not* require a fee depending upon the size of the TX and the age of it's UTXO's (so if you've set your bitcoin-qt client to not pay any mandatory fee then it won't unless a fee is *required*).

Quote from: Barek on November 08, 2013, 10:11:52 AM

Where can you see the transaction queue and the unconfirmed transactions?

You can get this info from blockchain.info here http://blockchain.info/unconfirmed-transactions (currently nearly 3000) and the beeping of the confirmations may make that link more than a bit annoying (they should probably drop that *feature* from that page).

mprep

global moderator

Activity: 3794

Merit: 2612

In a world of peaches, don't ask for apple sauce

Quote from: payb.tc on November 08, 2013, 09:32:37 AM

an easier method for less advanced users would be to simply let the original 'free' transaction go through, but for a seperate payment to the pool.

(i.e. you pay the pool 0.001 btc and tell them which free tx you want them to include in their next block)

that way novices don't have to figure out how to resend a transaction (which as far as I know, bitcoin-qt won't allow)

That sounds like a great idea. I read many threads complaining about non confirmed transactions for weeks and this would solve all of them as well as bring a bit of profit to the pools. Come one, pool operators - golden idea right here. Grin

Barek

full member

Activity: 168

Merit: 100

Are those no-fee transactions that get ignored?

Because the minimum fee is what now? 0.0001 btc? I would call that little.

Where can you see the transaction queue and the unconfirmed transactions?

Topic: Not enough profits with 25 BTC reward to include more tx's? (Read 2618 times)