Topic: Trxn Fees- Can they really sustain the mining network? (Read 1058 times)

Mining is one fo the things that secures the entire network, and if no one got around to do it because of lack of incentive, the network would just come to a total halt. That's actually the same dilema the bitcoin core dev team is in right now.

The last block that will generate coins will be block #6,929,999 which should be generated at or near the year 2140.


Honestly WTF do you care?
If that estimate is off by 75 YEARS it will be 2065 when the last block is mined.
2065 is 51 years from now....51 years!

None, technically.  If there's even just 1 miner out there with a reasonable hash rate at that time that feels like including a transaction with zero fee in a block, then it'll get included.  That even happens right now, it's just that they get prioritized away in favor of those with fees or those transactions that transact a larger sum.

So let's assume that one should in fact include a fee, and for sake of argument, imagine that only a single transaction is included in each block - then the fee for that single transaction should equal or exceed the expense of mining the block.  But then here comes your third question:

Probably.  Maybe not, but probably.  But when that happens, the overall network hash rate drops.  Which means the difficulty drops.  Which means that it becomes relatively more profitable again to keep a miner running.  Ideally, some state of equilibrium would naturally get reached.  Less ideally, the more efficient hardware or hardware hosted in areas where e.g. cooling is free and/or electricity is free will have an advantage (as is already the case now, just not as pronounced as it would be then).

Mind you, 'the last block' is a very long time from now - you and I will almost certainly be dead.  I'd say wait and see what happens come mid-2016 when the block reward is halved.. it will be an almost unique time in mining in that it will be an abrupt change that is relatively large (the one from 50 to 25 was larger, but mining was in its infancy anyway - while the one after is 'just' from 12.5 to 6.25) while mining is still likely to be a very busy industry (even if it all moves to giant farms) so we can see how the mining market reacts to that one.

But even that is 2 years out - and 2 years is practically an eternity for mining.  If you remember the Block Erupter USB - that was introduced a little over 1 year ago.  Who knows what will happen in that time alone - never mind by the time 'the last block' is mined

So the height of the fee hinges on what the operating expenses would be for miners that would mine that block, and if you can predict that - you should probably be in the business of predicting world cup match outcomes instead

I feel major players will have to pack up when the reward halves again which is approaching at an ever increasing rate..  If the trans fees aren't mandatory by then even if only minute percentage it could be disastrous... what if it was made to be dynamic in relation to the amount of transactions.. in the trans it need to state that at most your fee can be x amount. then when the block is found it needs to go back through and charge the fees after..it  needs to add up  to at least 25 btc but maybe 50 or more to distribute as reward...im just thinking and this could be very stupid I don't know...  I realize everyone wants free trans but its not sustainable ..

d57heinz

At present, adding transaction fees to your bitcoin payments are optional, and the main goal for mining is to claim the 25BTC block solution reward. Once the last block has been mined, can transaction fees really support the mining industry?

How many transactions need to include fees?
How much should those fees be?
Would major players in the mining industry pack up and leave after the last block gets mined?