Topic: Raise the minimum transaction fee - page 4. (Read 2992 times)

why this is still doing? It seems like somebody really want to force people to use much higher fees than it should be! Somebody is hunting fees for his pool! It was common to use fee 0.0001 and tx was confirmed in several tens minutes. This is incredible, BTC is getting very bad reputation this way.
this tx is marked as high priority but it is waiting for confirmation 14 hours now!


I am reading blockchain twitter now and there is a tweet about using BTC at tavern in Greece on holiday. Do you really believe that they were able to pay for their lunch? now where network is rejecting thousands of txs? This tweet is only a part of propagation that there is nothing bad and in fact everything is fine, but no! there is nothing fine and something is going wrong.

The last stress test was mabe only the window for somebody - how to do it, how to break BTC network. Why did not you use test network for the last stress test??? Nobody would not be able to learn this kind of "attack" if you did so!
You are telling us that network is rejecting only dust/spam txs, but as you can see network is rejecting proper txs too. And not only several, but several thousands of them. Hurry up and do something! Why people run their BTCCore for supporting network if you are breaking it?

Agree, the transaction cost tends to reflect the dust level of sending and is adjusted appropriately to circumstances
If a transaction wants to be put at a higher priority all that is required is a manual settings change to add on additional fees.

they you cut down it to 100 satoshi or something, and unless 1 satoshi will be worth $5(which mean that everybody will be rich and will forget completely about this spam fest) i don't think there will be any problem, you can always customize it

You can have your own choice about transaction fees, you can either fix it to the default value or increase according to your security and safety measures, if you fixed to default an attacker might know every time that the transactions going on intrinsic value and if you not the other way round.

but what happens when .0005 bitcoin is worth $5 or more?  I don't like the current general impressions of what transaction fees should be.  I think they should cap out at .00000100 satoshi or be percentage rate based but an extremely low percentage... maybe .001 percent or lower.  High transaction fees at this stage are extremely self-defeating and do not do justice to the value of bitcoin.  

I agree with this, for the moment I have also been increases fees from 0.0002 - 0.0005 to avoid transaction so long.

.0005 is 15 cents dude.

I think that this solution is not the best, because with this arrangement you give a worst condition to "basic user" or to some one that use BTC for the lower transaction fee, or for send smaller quantities.

As I have stated in two other threads already.

A large amount of the transactions on the network are spam in my humble opinion. If you cut out all the transactions under 5 cents that's like 90% of the traffic. (even before the attack)

As Bitcoin grows in popularity the network will naturally over time adjust the cutoff limits (minimum fees) so in times of heavy load micro transactions (less then 1 cent) will be "put on the back burner" till higher priority transactions with higher fees use the network and then when things calm down the smaller transactions will be validated.

I say let the market miners decide the minimum transaction fee rate.  If it gos above 50 cents then will have consensus for a small 2MB block increase before the sun sets.

The only risk right now is decoupling of the network (mico forks) because of propagation lag; this would only get worse right now if we increased the block size.

I, for one, welcome our new mining cartel overloads.

A possible fix would be to add optional code into our network nodes to change the minimum fee required per transaction size for propagation based on the current size of the mempool. The best part about this idea is its completely optional and dose not require a hard fork. But at the same time allows all users to vote on what the minium fee should be under heavy load.  As the mempool size increases the minimum fees necessary for propagation threw the network would rise accordingly and fall accordingly.  A simple sliding scale GUI could be added to all Full node clients for easy adjustments or be hard coded but configurable by the more tech savvy. This would prevent spam from ever reaching the mempool where upon it can't be deleted.

.0005 is still a tiny amount.

If the trans fee isn't an issue then why is everybody complaining about the spam issue? clearly something needs to be done and this is a simple way to make these attacks economically unfeasible.

I don't mind adding bigger fee but low fee is one of the good things about bitcoin that I boast to others whilst telling them about BTC and I guess if miners start delaying TXs with 10-20k Satoshi fee a lot than I would have to cross it from my list.

Maybe it is what the attackers want, make miners rise their fees so transfer bitcoins will be less advantageous for the non spammers.

I wish there are other ways

I agree with most of the above, the cost system works pretty well and I don't think that changing it is the solution to the spam problem.   There are some good solutions but imo this isn't one of them.

I hope I don't tweak anyone's melon with this, but I personally am not too concerned that the guy who wants to transfer eleven cents needs to fork over more than that if he wants to get the transaction to confirm quickly.

It would be a problem for someone who just want send small amount of Bitcoin, lets say he want to send 0.0004. But the transaction fee is too high for him. So, transaction failed.

You want to get your transaction confirmed faster than anyone else's? Raise your fee, you are free to do so. Raising the fee isn't necessary because the minimum fee is still feasible for the miners as incentives. Well, I can pay $1 for fees but I have the patience to wait for it to confirm, so I'll pay the minimum, which is $0.03 at current rates, Freedom to pay what you like for fees, that's what bitcoin offers that isn't available to any other payment processors out there.

The transaction fee set for blockchain can be adjusted while I pay a fixed fee of 0.0001 BTC. Now since there is an issue with blockchain, I need to raise it to 0.0005. I, however, don't want that too be a fixed fee for all my transactions and I want to decide the minimal fee every time.

transaction fees are voluntary and only sender should decide about setting the fee and I really don't like the idea, that fee will be somehow fixed as "minimal one". If somebody wants to prioritize TX, he may set higher fee, if he don't care how long it takes, he may set the lowest possible one.

this is just how market works, I hope, that devs will leave this part as is. what is problem these days is simply size of block..

^This^.

It should be easy to set the transaction fee the user wants to pay.  If the wallet doesn't have this capability, hopefully the recent events will cause users to demand it.

This guy just payed $5 to get his coins into the chain.
https://blockchain.info/tx/4e4f96c5ba416961be347ffc496e8ce12046191ab7fb252e88966ce365d2bc5f

Eligius eventually saw the offer and took him up on it when they won a block.

You are free to raise the minimum transaction fee that you pay. Just as I am free to raise the minimum transaction fee that I pay. Or not. If you do, your transactions will confirm promptly. If not, your transactions may languish waiting on some free block space.

Market mechanisms work. There is no problem here.