Isn't it because they found the block chain the transaction fees goes to them regardless? For the new coins generated right now, it goes to the current miners. For the old coins circulating from way back when, the transaction fees goes to those old miners. Right? So essentially it can get sent to an unused address?
Topic: Transaction fees too much? (Read 3123 times)
Isn't it because they found the block chain the transaction fees goes to them regardless? For the new coins generated right now, it goes to the current miners. For the old coins circulating from way back when, the transaction fees goes to those old miners. Right? So essentially it can get sent to an unused address?
Version 0.9 will have some improvements to fee computation. The current client "rounds up" the tx size to next full KB so fees are in increments of the min fee amount or other larger amount set by user (i.e. 0.1 mBTC, 0.2mBTC, 0.3 mBTC etc). However miners prioritize tx by actual fee / actual size. So a person with 400 byte tx would pay 0.1 mBTC but this works out to 0.25 mBTC per KB which is likely much larger than necessary for timely inclusion in a block.
This mismatch will be corrected in v0.9. Most tx are less than 1KB. The average tx is around 2 inputs and 2 output and ~400 bytes. So 0.1 mBTC per KB on 400 bytes would be 0.04 mBTC. Even without a reduction in fee rules the actual fee paid on this tx would be reduced by 60%.
This mismatch will be corrected in v0.9. Most tx are less than 1KB. The average tx is around 2 inputs and 2 output and ~400 bytes. So 0.1 mBTC per KB on 400 bytes would be 0.04 mBTC. Even without a reduction in fee rules the actual fee paid on this tx would be reduced by 60%.
At $1000 a bitcoin (yeah just rounding of simplicity) that is $0.10 per kb of data, which does seem pretty high.
For example, the average transaction fee in the most recent block as of this:
http://blockchain.info/block-index/447052/000000000000000297670c7da6af4c6b66d3f0bc34796480e253f6c95c571243
was 0.000188 BTC in fees or $0.19 per transaction.
If you do a $1 transaction, you will be spending nearly 20% on fees. Goodbye micro-transactions.
That is not very competitive against paypal and other payment systems. I know this isn't exactly the goal of the project, but it would make sense for it to be only a few dollar cents per transaction so that digital sales services can sell things like songs, digital assets, and other low cost things without racking up huge fees.
As it is, only things valued at over $10 per transaction would be sensible (this would be a about a 2% transaction fee at that price point).
For example, the average transaction fee in the most recent block as of this:
http://blockchain.info/block-index/447052/000000000000000297670c7da6af4c6b66d3f0bc34796480e253f6c95c571243
was 0.000188 BTC in fees or $0.19 per transaction.
If you do a $1 transaction, you will be spending nearly 20% on fees. Goodbye micro-transactions.
That is not very competitive against paypal and other payment systems. I know this isn't exactly the goal of the project, but it would make sense for it to be only a few dollar cents per transaction so that digital sales services can sell things like songs, digital assets, and other low cost things without racking up huge fees.
As it is, only things valued at over $10 per transaction would be sensible (this would be a about a 2% transaction fee at that price point).
Don't you think it is a little too much to have .0001 BTC per transaction?
Who knows if the people receiving those transaction fees are still even around these days? So those transaction fees essentially go away into oblivion, never to be seen again.....
What do you think?
It's not 0.0001 BTC per tx, it's 0.0001 BTC (or 10,000 satoshis) per 1,000 bytes. The larger the tx data, the higher the fee. The data size of a tx is not related to it's input or output amount. A 0.03 BTC tx can be much larger than a 500 BTC tx.Who knows if the people receiving those transaction fees are still even around these days? So those transaction fees essentially go away into oblivion, never to be seen again.....
What do you think?
Anyway, I agree. I think for mass acceptance of Bitcoin, it's important to keep the 'almost free transactions' advantage, and 0.00001 BTC (that's 1000 satoshis) per KB data would be a better choice!
I don't think so. Not going to happen. I pity the miner (person) who gets infected with a virus on his miner (hardware.)
What you described and linked to are botnets. The victims of those, are generally called zombies. The owners or operators of the actual computers, are usually ignorant of what's going on with their system. They are not miners the way we usually refer to them.
Max amount of coins is reached in more than 100 years. 99% of coins reached in about 25 years. Miners will make all their profit from transaction fees, which may or may not equal the current block rewards now. There will probably still be petahashes or more of mining power, so there won't be a "few" miners. As a percentage of actual users to miners ratio, it might be small, but the bitcoin network of tomorrow will be more secure than today.
What you described and linked to are botnets. The victims of those, are generally called zombies. The owners or operators of the actual computers, are usually ignorant of what's going on with their system. They are not miners the way we usually refer to them.
Max amount of coins is reached in more than 100 years. 99% of coins reached in about 25 years. Miners will make all their profit from transaction fees, which may or may not equal the current block rewards now. There will probably still be petahashes or more of mining power, so there won't be a "few" miners. As a percentage of actual users to miners ratio, it might be small, but the bitcoin network of tomorrow will be more secure than today.
Yeah forget that virus statement, I put it in as an afterthought, it's definitely possible but unlikely. Sorry if you can't imagine it.
I quoted Dabs and added some quick links to show that it has already happened, in a way. If the owner of a computer that was mining bitcoin is called a miner, then those people who were mining bitcoins were already infected with a virus. It has already happened.
You might not be able to imagine the virus scenario now because technology is not as widespread as it will be. TVs and now game consoles are now starting to become specialized computers, one day everything will be.
Like I said it's possible it can happen in the future. If Bitcoin were to become mainstream currency and Bitcoin has reached it's max amount of coins therefore only few computers are actually mining, then that 'unlikely' scenario would become more likely, 'very' likely.
It wouldn't have to infect the computer itself, simply the house (advanced future 'smart' house) or building that the Bitcoin miner resides in, turn of all the electricity or jam Wireless internet access (maybe a ddos or a more advanced form), and there you go, no transactions.
I quoted Dabs and added some quick links to show that it has already happened, in a way. If the owner of a computer that was mining bitcoin is called a miner, then those people who were mining bitcoins were already infected with a virus. It has already happened.
You might not be able to imagine the virus scenario now because technology is not as widespread as it will be. TVs and now game consoles are now starting to become specialized computers, one day everything will be.
Like I said it's possible it can happen in the future. If Bitcoin were to become mainstream currency and Bitcoin has reached it's max amount of coins therefore only few computers are actually mining, then that 'unlikely' scenario would become more likely, 'very' likely.
It wouldn't have to infect the computer itself, simply the house (advanced future 'smart' house) or building that the Bitcoin miner resides in, turn of all the electricity or jam Wireless internet access (maybe a ddos or a more advanced form), and there you go, no transactions.
No, transaction fees are fine where they are at the moment, if you can't afford 10 cents then you why are you even transacting in the first place. If your really that tight then you can send with no fees, just don't expect them to be transacted anytime soon. As a side note, how exactly would a virus be able to target the miners themselves, even if it actually occurred people would notice and it wouldn't get particularly far...
Virus are unlikely to target miners.
Keyword 'unlikely' 
Seriously? You think some cross-platform virus is going to take out every miner in the world? Do giant asteroids colliding with earth worry you too?
Yes, the virus itself is a miner, in those cases.
But you mentioned a virus that would wipe out the important miners, like mining pools. The ones who are already mining. They are unlikely to be easy targets. For one, those computers that run the miners are not usually receiving or sending anything else but block chain data and relaying transactions. They are also usually stand alone units rather than general purpose computers. Especially the ASIC miners.
Virus are unlikely to target miners.
Instead, virus authors would create a virus that mines, so when it spreads, they have bitcoins. I think that's what is being shown in your links.
But you mentioned a virus that would wipe out the important miners, like mining pools. The ones who are already mining. They are unlikely to be easy targets. For one, those computers that run the miners are not usually receiving or sending anything else but block chain data and relaying transactions. They are also usually stand alone units rather than general purpose computers. Especially the ASIC miners.
Virus are unlikely to target miners.
Instead, virus authors would create a virus that mines, so when it spreads, they have bitcoins. I think that's what is being shown in your links.
Virus are unlikely to target miners.
Keyword 'unlikely'
http://www.bleepingcomputer.com/forums/t/504346/have-a-bitcoin-miner-virus-making-my-computer-unuseable/
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2013-04/8/bitcoin-trojan
https://blog.avast.com/2013/08/01/malicious-bitcoin-miners-target-czech-republic/
http://www.reddit.com/r/techsupport/comments/1dth15/bitcoin_mining_virustrojan_removal/
https://forums.malwarebytes.org/index.php?showtopic=125534
https://forums.malwarebytes.org/index.php?showtopic=133165
Virus are unlikely to target miners.
Right now fees are sorta related to the size of the transaction, because that is the part that matters, and not the amounts involved. The amounts in the transaction bear no relationship to the resources consumed by the transaction, so we will probably never switch to that system (but there is nothing stopping individual miners from adopting whatever policy they want).
Quote
So ONE YEAR LATER that same bitcoin is being transacted, THE ORIGINAL MINER still gets the coin.
This is 100% wrong and no matter how many times you keep saying it, it won't get any more correct.
Your understanding is flawed I corrected you and you cling to a flawed understanding.
A miner who solves a block TODAY gets the tx fees for the transactions in the block. PERIOD. They never get a single satoshi more in the future. The fees in txs in future blocks will go to the miners of those block.
TRANSACTIONS are placed in blocks.
The TRANSACTIONS fees go ONLY to the miner who solves the block the TRANSACTION is placed in.
There is no future revenue stream.
If you solve a block today which has 100 transactions and 0.5 BTC in fees you will get 0.5 BTC in fees TODAY and NOTHING in the future. The fees for tx included in future blocks will go to whoever solves those blocks in the future.
Ohh I see. That is how it works then! Thanks for explaining that.
Yeah my understanding was flawed and incorrect. I was completely wrong. So if there were no more miners, no more transaction fees, no more transactions, period. All it takes is a single complex fast spreading virus to end it all...
Still, do you think transaction fees should be lowered? To count as fixed price depending on transaction tiers? Especially for microtransactions. For 0.0001 BTC transfer you would have to spend 0.0001 BTC (100%) as transaction fee. If it were all tiered, then there wouldn't be a problem.
For example a transaction table for the amount of BTC transferred and the transaction fee associated with that
.1+ BTC = .0001 BTC transaction fee
.01+ BTC = .00005 BTC transaction fee
.001+ BTC = .00001 BTC transaction fee
etc?
Transactions are included in blocks. Fees from those transactions go to the miner that mined that block.
Future transactions are going to be included in different blocks that whoever mines will be the one that will get the fees.
Future transactions are going to be included in different blocks that whoever mines will be the one that will get the fees.
It would be foolish for a miner to mine a block and have those transaction fees sent to an address he does not control anymore. It's possible for a miner to have his coins sent to a paper wallet.
Quote
So ONE YEAR LATER that same bitcoin is being transacted, THE ORIGINAL MINER still gets the coin.
This is 100% wrong and no matter how many times you keep saying it, it won't get any more correct. Your understanding is flawed I corrected you and you cling to a flawed understanding. It might be a good idea to understand Bitcoin before trying to fix it. There is no such thing as the "ORIGINAL MINER" with respect to transaction fees. Fees go to the miner who places a tx into the block, that is always an active current miner.
A miner who solves a block today gets the tx fees for all the transactions in the block. The fees don't go to anyone else other than the miner/pool that includes those tx in a block they solve. The miners will never get a single satoshi more in the future. Any future fees, on future txs, will go to whoever solves those future blocks.
For example this block:
https://blockchain.info/block-index/445880/000000000000000124725a59db557f3296ad70aac6e3ce5207238587c0656ddf
the miner includes 429 tx in the block. The sum of the tx fees for those 429 txs is 0.08670025 BTC. All 0.08670025 BTC goes to the miner (pool) which solved the block. No miner that solves a prior or future blocks gets any of that 0.08670025 BTC paid in fees.
No that isn't how it works. First you keep using the word "blockchain" there is only one blockchain. Tx fees go to the miner who solves the BLOCK which contains the tx. i.e. if you solve a block TODAY, you get the tx fees TODAY for the tx in the block you mined TODAY.
I used blockchain once. Plus the only reason I used blockchain was because I saw people using 'block', and I thought 'block' was short for blockchain. So a block is a part of the blockchain while the blockchain is the whole, that doesn't take away what I said at all besides a slight misunderstanding. Block chain in Chinese is 塊鏈, in Spanish it's cadena articulada, doesn't matter what I call it because you knew what I was referring to.
No that isn't how it works. Tx fees go to the miner who solves the BLOCK which contains the tx tx. i.e. if you solve a block TODAY, you get the tx fees TODAY for the tx in the block you mined TODAY
I already said that. If a person mines something TODAY and he sends that bitcoin off to someone, HE gets the transaction fees. So ONE YEAR LATER that same bitcoin is being transacted, THE ORIGINAL MINER still gets the coin.
So if that miner DELETED HIS WALLET then all the BTC would be sent to his deleted wallet.
I did not say anything new here because I understood the process since the first post, I only put unsure question marks because maybe I was wrong, but you just said the same thing I did. Yet you said I was wrong the first time. All because I used 'blockchain' once
No that isn't how it works. First you keep using the word "blockchain" there is only one blockchain. Tx fees go to the miner who solves the BLOCK which contains the tx. i.e. if you solve a block TODAY, you get the tx fees TODAY for the tx in the block you mined TODAY.
If they aren't around anymore then they aren't mining and thus the tx fees aren't going to 'them'.
Isn't it because they found the block chain the transaction fees goes to them regardless? For the new coins generated right now, it goes to the current miners. For the old coins circulating from way back when, the transaction fees goes to those old miners. Right? So essentially it can get sent to an unused address?Also here's another issue: microtransactions. If you want to transfer 0.0001 BTC, you'd have to pay 0.0001 BTC, essentially 100% of the price. I think it's a huge issue...
If they aren't around anymore then they aren't mining, thus aren't solving any blocks, and the the tx fees aren't going to 'them' they are going to some active miner/pool who solved the most recent block.
Jump to: