Topic: Some of bitcoin's aim and purpose have been trampled upon (Read 282 times)
I can relate to the fees, if you were making a transaction of so much money, you wouldn’t notice but if you wanted to transact little, then it becomes obvious. The good thing about all of this is that the transaction fee is not fixed. The fact that we’ve seen fees way lower than what it is now gives us hope that it’ll be lower again. Ethereum did the same thing the other time and I recall that I had paid transaction fee of over $50. Today, it’s a lot different.
Financial institutions are fighting their best to keep Bitcoin at half mast and leave their financial structures afloat and shoving it down people's throats, this is done at the surface, beneath the surface, its still gaining traction.
The reason why Bitcoin and crypto related projects is being sued is just because they want to trample upon its aims but I trust them to loose out on their bids.
The reason why Bitcoin and crypto related projects is being sued is just because they want to trample upon its aims but I trust them to loose out on their bids.
No sudden spike of block time and I disagree to call that Bitcoin has a network congestion.
Depends on what you say this congestion refers to:
- network health, yeah is not congestion because the network can't carry more data to experience packet loss
- transaction confirmation it's pretty much a congestion there, there are more tx waiting than can pass in the next block, and the moment even on of them is refused because of lack of space you have text book traffic congestion.
Even when we didn't have Ordinals, fees were quite high for payments purposes.
The median fee was almost all year except for the first Ordinal spam wave and the now second one below 1$ on average, constantly touching 10-20 cents range, it might have been much for some countries but when I see my favorite coffee at 1.99 euro 10 cents is still doable, once you go over $10 it becomes less than 1%.
Even when we didn't have Ordinals, fees were quite high for payments purposes.
As for Bitcoin Core, I wouldn't say that they don't want bitcoin to be for payments — it's just the fact that they think the base layer needs to be decentralized enough and easy enough for node-running. Their preferred solution is to have payments infrastructure on a different layer, though unfortunately none has been successful as of yet.
I rather believe the fees issues were not expected and Bitcoin is already too massive to make big changes and experiments. If we were back in 2010 it would be easier to experiment. Now it is something along the lines of a business contemplating a rebranding after years of decline in revenue. It is very risky.As for Bitcoin Core, I wouldn't say that they don't want bitcoin to be for payments — it's just the fact that they think the base layer needs to be decentralized enough and easy enough for node-running. Their preferred solution is to have payments infrastructure on a different layer, though unfortunately none has been successful as of yet.
Another Layer is the least risky way of experimenting as of now. Layers and trying out new features on Shitcoins before even contemplating adding them to Bitcoin.
Exactly what am thinking. Perhaps the core developers have decided that BTC should not be used for payments, but as digital gold and as a store of value. Only the rich BTC holders can easily make payment these days. Little amount of Bitcoin transactions on the blockchain is hardly made. The might still be the block size limit and something should be done about it. Am having a though that the price will remain high like this for some time at least till the ordinal hype of a thing is over and if they are reduce now we might be waiting hours for confirmations.
Even when we didn't have Ordinals, fees were quite high for payments purposes.
As for Bitcoin Core, I wouldn't say that they don't want bitcoin to be for payments — it's just the fact that they think the base layer needs to be decentralized enough and easy enough for node-running. Their preferred solution is to have payments infrastructure on a different layer, though unfortunately none has been successful as of yet.
Am I the only one seeing this recent happening on the high transaction's fee of bitcoin as a direct attack on bitcoin purpose?
Tbh, It can be seen as an attack as it deprives others the opportunity to use the cryptocurrency they love and own!!But then if we talk of financial freedom, we need people to use their coins however they like but if this spamming of the network makes it unused, then let's take this as positive criticism and allow for large volumes of transactions!!! Perhaps another fork by our devs should be in the pipe line...
Some of the things that make bitcoin unique and part of its purpose are: privacy, decentralisation, transparency, security, seamless transactions, and above all, financial freedom. Being in control of your holdings—when I say control, I mean total control—you decide when to spend your holdings and when not to spend them, and there is no limitation in terms of when they could be used.
If we are talking about no limitations, then the spamming of the network should also be accepted as these transactions are not free and being paid for at a premium by the users.... choosing to control how people spend their Bitcoins makes us no different from our governments and love to control everything.Some of bitcoin's aim and purpose have been trampled upon, which don't look good on the network at all.
Supply and demand will also play their role and affect it negatively or positively which is something we don't account for...
This high transaction fee is affecting those who don't know how to make use of the lightning network, am among those that doesn't much about this lightning network, I wanted to do a little transaction, what they wanted to charge as a transaction fee for just 41$ is 11$, I was helpless at that moment, this made made me decide to hold for a while until the transaction fee is reduced a little, but the truth is, it has affected me because there are things I wanted to use that fund for, as for the reliability, security and other benefits that's accompanied with bitcoin, they are all intact.
There is nothing about Bitcoin that's affected, so I am quit confused about what you mean, it's transparency works still, it's privacy works still, it's decentralization works still, if the high transaction fee is your major problem learn to use the lightening network, problem solved.
Bitcoin fits to be a store of value more than a means of payment, and if you are accepting Bitcoin as means of payment right now then know that some customers will choose to use other digital currencies to pay just to avoid the high transaction fee unless you start accepting lightening network transaction too.
I prefer to store my money in Bitcoin as a store of value than spending it here and there, Bitcoin is more of a digital Gold (an asset) than a digital currency means for making payment.
Bitcoin fits to be a store of value more than a means of payment, and if you are accepting Bitcoin as means of payment right now then know that some customers will choose to use other digital currencies to pay just to avoid the high transaction fee unless you start accepting lightening network transaction too.
I prefer to store my money in Bitcoin as a store of value than spending it here and there, Bitcoin is more of a digital Gold (an asset) than a digital currency means for making payment.
The way i have used Bitcoin for a while is this: I use Bitcoin as a store of value. My largest holding and i only rarely take from it.
For smaller payments i need to make i use something like USDT on Tron. Its just better for small and fast payments. While Lightning is also an option, its just not widely adopted enough to have an impact
Exactly what am thinking. Perhaps the core developers have decided that BTC should not be used for payments, but as digital gold and as a store of value. Only the rich BTC holders can easily make payment these days. Little amount of Bitcoin transactions on the blockchain is hardly made. The might still be the block size limit and something should be done about it. Am having a though that the price will remain high like this for some time at least till the ordinal hype of a thing is over and if they are reduce now we might be waiting hours for confirmations. For smaller payments i need to make i use something like USDT on Tron. Its just better for small and fast payments. While Lightning is also an option, its just not widely adopted enough to have an impact
The way i have used Bitcoin for a while is this: I use Bitcoin as a store of value. My largest holding and i only rarely take from it.
For smaller payments i need to make i use something like USDT on Tron. Its just better for small and fast payments. While Lightning is also an option, its just not widely adopted enough to have an impact
For smaller payments i need to make i use something like USDT on Tron. Its just better for small and fast payments. While Lightning is also an option, its just not widely adopted enough to have an impact
It is due to this ordinals trend, once people forget about it we will come back to more reasonable fees
When someone can no longer use the network and perform transactions however they want without being forced to either use the lightning network that's for those who know how to set that up or being forced to make use of some other shit altcoins out of their whereabouts, is that freedom?
Some of bitcoin's aim and purpose have been trampled upon, which don't look good on the network at all.
It is temporary and with time the congestion in the network will reduce and the transaction fee will decrease too but till then yeah we can't leverage the seamless transaction experience as we have to wait for confirmation longer than before. And the saying the market belongs to the rich who can afford to spend huge fees for their transactions might be wrong because the market is for everyone, but yeah those who have no funds can't increase the fee or those who don't know that they can increase their transaction fee using the RBF function.Some of bitcoin's aim and purpose have been trampled upon, which don't look good on the network at all.
There would be many cases like these but I think in future this will be solved and we will see the transaction fee coming down.
Bitcoin's transaction fees have changed. Bitcoin promised financial freedom and unrestricted commerce. Bitcoin's essence looks eroded by high transaction prices caused by network congestion.
Blocks are found like normal, average time is about 10 minutes.https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/bitcoin-confirmationtime.html#3y
No sudden spike of block time and I disagree to call that Bitcoin has a network congestion. There are more transactions waiting in mempools and Ordinals trigger transaction fee race that make transaction fee more expensive than before February 2023, when there is no Ordinals, Inscriptions.
I see this expensive transaction fee time is not good for everyone but if we can wait, we can have confirmed transactions with lower fee rates because hype, FOMO can not last forever.
Bitcoin's transaction fees have changed. Bitcoin promised financial freedom and unrestricted commerce. Bitcoin's essence looks eroded by high transaction prices caused by network congestion.
Most holders are sidelined by high fees and slow transactions. The Bitcoin ecosystem's accessibility and equity are at risk, not simply fees. Ironically, finance-democratizing technology is becoming exclusive.
But lets be practical. Rising fees arent a blip; they're part of Bitcoin's growth path. As the network grows and changes use, such issues will arise. The more popular and helpful Bitcoin grows, the more it struggles under its own success. This is Bitcoin's rising anguish, not its end. The answer? Continued innovation and adaptation, possibly accepting high fees as a necessary evil for a more robust and scalable future.
Most holders are sidelined by high fees and slow transactions. The Bitcoin ecosystem's accessibility and equity are at risk, not simply fees. Ironically, finance-democratizing technology is becoming exclusive.
But lets be practical. Rising fees arent a blip; they're part of Bitcoin's growth path. As the network grows and changes use, such issues will arise. The more popular and helpful Bitcoin grows, the more it struggles under its own success. This is Bitcoin's rising anguish, not its end. The answer? Continued innovation and adaptation, possibly accepting high fees as a necessary evil for a more robust and scalable future.
But based on the recent happenings on the transaction fee, which is a result of the network being too congested, which is a result of the Ordinal and the hype that follows with the minted NFT on the network, now an average holder who wants to make some transactions can't execute a smooth transaction when ever they want to or however they want it to be, the network is now for the rich, and those willing to pay the high fee get their transaction to the top.
You talked about total control of your bitcoin. With good control, coin control feature, fee rate customization, you can use a fee rate that is good for you and your capital.You can observe mempools and pick good times with proper fee rates to broadcast your transaction to mempools and wait for miners to confirm it for you.
A Bitcoin user, a Bitcoin investor must have other reserves to use. You can not store all money you have in bitcoin and when you need to make payment, you have to either sell your bitcoin at any price at that time or have to move your bitcoin with any fee rate you must use at that time.
You can have cash or stable coin in small amount that can be used when you can not use Bitcoin with cheap fee rate or when you don't want to sell your bitcoin at low price.
Yes, it sucks, but always remember that Bitcoin is NOT a finished product (and maybe it will never be because there will always be something to improve upon). Bitcoin's rise in both price and usage is something that would probably surprise even Satoshi himself. Scalability will be improved. It's just a matter of 'when'.
I hope that 'when' is going to happen before bitcoin goes to my target price, I don't want to be paying myself about the chunk of what I hodl for selling it. Can we really blame that the network is going towards this way? Wasn't this kind of system of FCFS has been in existence for a long time now right? And this is the way to compensate miners for their effort now that bitcoin mining rewards are slowly reducing due to halving. the network is now for the rich, and those willing to pay the high fee get their transaction to the top.
I find it funny how after 1000 topics of how Bitcoin will stop poverty and do some wealth redistribution and help the small guy and all that suddenly everyone realizes that Bitcoin is the perfect example of capitalism
- my money my business, can't stop me from spending on what I want
- you have more money to invest you have more returns
- you pay more you have priority
- no % based on how much you earn or you transfer, 1 billion or 10 cents transferred you pay the same
Guess we need to have some of these wake-up calls now and then!
Yes, it sucks, but always remember that Bitcoin is NOT a finished product (and maybe it will never be because there will always be something to improve upon). Bitcoin's rise in both price and usage is something that would probably surprise even Satoshi himself. Scalability will be improved. It's just a matter of 'when'.
hero member
Activity: 770
Merit: 538
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
For the sake of newbies who would want to come aboard and also for those accepting Bitcoin payments in their businesses, the fee is fucking discouraging. Just about a month ago, we were celebrating how low the fee had dropped because we also faced this same issue some months ago same in this year. Now, we are still here again.
When someone can no longer use the network and perform transactions however they want without being forced to either use the lightning network that's for those who know how to set that up or being forced to make use of some other shit altcoins out of their whereabouts, is that freedom?
I presume that Transaction congestion would not be a problem any more if there was a way to create unlimited Block size and have unlimited storage. But we can not have neither of them so there has to be limits.It is still freedom. There needs to be a priority list. Otherwise how do Miners decide which Transaction goes first? If we are talking Bitcoin in 2010 it would not be an issue. Miners could pick up Transactions randomly and still keep the Mempool clear. But now Bitcoin gets so many transactions it is impossible to clear the queue in a random and fair way with zero or equal fees without making the Blockchain work in a weird way.
This 'priority list' makes most sense. If you need to consolidate UTXOs you just input the smallest fee possible that will still be picked up by a Miner. But to consolidate UTXOs does not require urgent confirmations compared to a restaurant bill. So for paying the restaurant bill you will have to pay higher fees to be among the first to be included in the next few Blocks.
There will be a solution to the congestion one day. Bitcoin is still growing and becoming stronger.
Jump to: