Topic: What's up with the high fees!? (Read 1378 times)
During the stress test, transactions with 0.0002btc per k fees were confirming just fine. It was delayed a bit but confirmed eventually. Only large transactions with 0.0001btc or lower fees were severely delayed. Business which upped the fee to 0.0005btc are wasting your money, you should email them about lowering to 0.0002btc. I think they are being overly cautious at your expense.
MellowAds raised their fee to 0.0005 BTC too. That sucks.
Then they will go to another coin just as less wealthy buy silver as gold cost too much, we will see litecoin grow and grow unless something happens and the blocksize is increased.
This approach is not sustainable, when the reward subsidy eventually wanes miners will have to live just on tx fees. And they better be hefty, or else it'll not be profitable to support the network and it will break down. There's no way around this.
So it begins.
The poorer users will be gradually pushed aside from the blockchain, just as industrial-grade miners have already pushed aside most small-time miners. It's built into the protocol
The poorer users will be gradually pushed aside from the blockchain, just as industrial-grade miners have already pushed aside most small-time miners. It's built into the protocol
Higher fees will serve poloniex's clients better, by speeding withdrawals
AgreeOn the other hand its main advantage of bitcoin network to keep fees low
Even if they will be 10 times higher it will be still worth to use bitcoin as store of value
What's up with the high fees!?
Many companies are lifting their withdraw fees;
From what I have seen Poloniex raised their fees...
"In order to help withdrawals get processed quickly by the network, the BTC withdrawal fee has been raised from 0.0001 to 0.0005."
What's up with the network? hasn't it been fixed?
Once mining is over, miners will only get the fees. One of the main reasons putting bitcoin ahead of Banks is transactions costs.
So, assuming that once mining is over the fess will be way higher, won't this be the same as Banks?
Many companies are lifting their withdraw fees;
From what I have seen Poloniex raised their fees...
"In order to help withdrawals get processed quickly by the network, the BTC withdrawal fee has been raised from 0.0001 to 0.0005."
What's up with the network? hasn't it been fixed?
Once mining is over, miners will only get the fees. One of the main reasons putting bitcoin ahead of Banks is transactions costs.
So, assuming that once mining is over the fess will be way higher, won't this be the same as Banks?
I also noticed poloniex makes the price higher and it is a double sward cause higher fees reduce spam transactions but can't help with circulation, more expensive fees make less people use bitcoin although 0.0005 fee is already low compared to bank or other similar agents.
No free lunch. Few seem to want to listen to Gavin's warning about block size. So if blocks can only include some transactions then you are going to have to pay to be one of those included transactions.
Aye, it would appear Gavin's idea is a solid one I just fear the interwebz backbone won't be able to keep up to what is required.
Gavin's idea isn't solid at all. It's not even based on solid research. It certainly doesn't fix potential problems with network spam, because such attacks would still be affordable.
The only thing that will reduce transaction spam is a healthy fee market. Fees should increase exponentially for small transactions with big data sizes. For those fearing of not being able to afford a frappochino: Sidechains will be available for such use cases.
So far the catastrophic scenarios that Gavin and Mike propagated turned out not to be true: Blocks are full now, but Bitcoin continues to work just fine. You just have to pay a little bit higher fees. With optimization on the fee market (higher penalties for smaller/big datasize TX's), the effects would be even smaller.
At some point there will be a blocksize increase, but if the "stress testing" has done anything good, then it's proving that there is no reason to rush this and risk decentralization with an excessive and half-baked "solution".
I would not want bitcoin to be a playfield for rich people only. Satoshi wanted people free of banks, that is something bigger.
What i don't understand is why transactions aren't charged per transaction. I mean those are many transactions put into one. Why should they pay less then? I mean if you want to send 100 letters by mail then you can put it into a big package and send it cheaper. But you can't reach different receivers with that. Oo
until now i wasn't forced to increase any fee, every TX that i've done was confirmed with the standard fee in the classic time range
i think should keep their fee at normal and don't play their game , wait more for your transaction, they will end the spam if their primarily object of forcing you to increase the fee will not work for some time
i think should keep their fee at normal and don't play their game , wait more for your transaction, they will end the spam if their primarily object of forcing you to increase the fee will not work for some time
Did you maybe use the official client, i mean bitcoin-qt? Then you would have paid higher fees than normal because that client is adjusting the fee to the level that is probably needed to get the transaction confirmed.
yeah i'm using core and i customize my fee every time, because if you leave them alone(recommended fees) they will be vastly reduced near 2k satoshi or something
never had any problem with 10k+ satoshi, i was paying 20k in the past but i had not seen any real difference with 10k, so i changed to 10k again
until now i wasn't forced to increase any fee, every TX that i've done was confirmed with the standard fee in the classic time range
i think should keep their fee at normal and don't play their game , wait more for your transaction, they will end the spam if their primarily object of forcing you to increase the fee will not work for some time
i think should keep their fee at normal and don't play their game , wait more for your transaction, they will end the spam if their primarily object of forcing you to increase the fee will not work for some time
Did you maybe use the official client, i mean bitcoin-qt? Then you would have paid higher fees than normal because that client is adjusting the fee to the level that is probably needed to get the transaction confirmed.
"In order to help withdrawals get processed quickly by the network, the BTC withdrawal fee has been raised from 0.0001 to 0.0005."
I hope they sat it back, now that the spam attack is not running anymore.
It was really annonying having to guess what fee you need to pay in order to be able to use your bitcoins the way they should work.
"In order to help withdrawals get processed quickly by the network, the BTC withdrawal fee has been raised from 0.0001 to 0.0005."
I hope they sat it back, now that the spam attack is not running anymore.
It was really annonying having to guess what fee you need to pay in order to be able to use your bitcoins the way they should work.
No free lunch. Few seem to want to listen to Gavin's warning about block size. So if blocks can only include some transactions then you are going to have to pay to be one of those included transactions.
Aye, it would appear Gavin's idea is a solid one I just fear the interwebz backbone won't be able to keep up to what is required.
Gavin's idea isn't solid at all. It's not even based on solid research. It certainly doesn't fix potential problems with network spam, because such attacks would still be affordable.
The only thing that will reduce transaction spam is a healthy fee market. Fees should increase exponentially for small transactions with big data sizes. For those fearing of not being able to afford a frappochino: Sidechains will be available for such use cases.
So far the catastrophic scenarios that Gavin and Mike propagated turned out not to be true: Blocks are full now, but Bitcoin continues to work just fine. You just have to pay a little bit higher fees. With optimization on the fee market (higher penalties for smaller/big datasize TX's), the effects would be even smaller.
At some point there will be a blocksize increase, but if the "stress testing" has done anything good, then it's proving that there is no reason to rush this and risk decentralization with an excessive and half-baked "solution".
until now i wasn't forced to increase any fee, every TX that i've done was confirmed with the standard fee in the classic time range
i think should keep their fee at normal and don't play their game , wait more for your transaction, they will end the spam if their primarily object of forcing you to increase the fee will not work for some time
i think should keep their fee at normal and don't play their game , wait more for your transaction, they will end the spam if their primarily object of forcing you to increase the fee will not work for some time
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/nothing-to-see-here-move-along-1125214
The fees will increase until legitimate traffic is less than half the block size.
This is because someone is executing a Golden Ratio Attack. I have no idea how to stop it. This is serious.
The fees will increase until legitimate traffic is less than half the block size.
This is because someone is executing a Golden Ratio Attack. I have no idea how to stop it. This is serious.
It's probably best not to speak in absolutes until it's confirmed. For now we should be saying "someone might be executing a Golden Ratio Attack". I can see how lots of people think this sucks at the moment, but I'm fairly confident this won't be a long-term issue. We'll find a workable solution in the end. It just takes a bit of time.
So we just suck it up, if the miners possibly spam the network to force people to pay higher fee's to get their transactions confirmed?
If it is them, and I have no proof of that... What prevents them from doing this again and again, until the transaction fee's have increased to a level where it's not cheaper than banks or other payment methods?
The developers must tweak the protocol to counter this, and protect the consumer from higher fee's. Some of the 3rd parties already add their own fee's on top of miners fee's.
Let's not forget that one of the incentives for using Bitcoin over other payment methods, was lower fee's.
If it is them, and I have no proof of that... What prevents them from doing this again and again, until the transaction fee's have increased to a level where it's not cheaper than banks or other payment methods?
The developers must tweak the protocol to counter this, and protect the consumer from higher fee's. Some of the 3rd parties already add their own fee's on top of miners fee's.
Let's not forget that one of the incentives for using Bitcoin over other payment methods, was lower fee's.
What's up with the high fees!?
Many companies are lifting their withdraw fees;
From what I have seen Poloniex raised their fees...
"In order to help withdrawals get processed quickly by the network, the BTC withdrawal fee has been raised from 0.0001 to 0.0005."
What's up with the network? hasn't it been fixed?
Once mining is over, miners will only get the fees. One of the main reasons putting bitcoin ahead of Banks is transactions costs.
So, assuming that once mining is over the fess will be way higher, won't this be the same as Banks?
Many companies are lifting their withdraw fees;
From what I have seen Poloniex raised their fees...
"In order to help withdrawals get processed quickly by the network, the BTC withdrawal fee has been raised from 0.0001 to 0.0005."
What's up with the network? hasn't it been fixed?
Once mining is over, miners will only get the fees. One of the main reasons putting bitcoin ahead of Banks is transactions costs.
So, assuming that once mining is over the fess will be way higher, won't this be the same as Banks?
i don't think that the exchangers (Poloniex as you mention here) raised the fee so that the transaction gets confirmed faster. they have raised it to earn more bitcoin from their users and nothing else.
because they are still paying the standard fee in the transactions (0.0001BTC) no matter how much they charge you when you withdraw.
for example bittrex charges 0.0002BTC for bitcoin withdrawals but if you check the transaction that they have sent you, you can see that its fee is 0.0001BTC
This whole thread is FUD. Bitcoin has no fees.
it have a recommended fees of 0.0001BTC per kb. also most exchanges always have higher than normal fees.
This whole thread is FUD. Bitcoin has no fees.
You must think about the customers. People are making transactions, and they take ages to get confirmed, so I guess there were plenty of people complaining. I've had one transaction failed last week, and another which took more than 12 hours. You just cannot run a business this way. To make sure transactions are fast, they've raised the fee. It might be unnecessary by now, but they don't want to take risks. I understand them.
Kraken is already (and from a long time ago) at 0,0005
VirVox is at 0,005 BTC.
Deal with It.
Exchange works.
Business.
What is the price of your plastic credit card, bro ?
Year 2017. Fee is now 1btc, because miners orchestrated stress/spam test n. 88894. Deal with it.VirVox is at 0,005 BTC.
Deal with It.
Exchange works.
Business.
What is the price of your plastic credit card, bro ?
Thank you for this. People need to see the whole picture not just that "its ok for now".
People who advocate that increasing the fee is the solution and should just suck it up and pay the fee, are usually miners in some way.
New users and the community understands fees will take over when block rewards can no long cover mining costs.
But the idea that higher fees are needed now to stop spam, is not true, and is a easy way to manipulate new users.
Jump to: