Why I think Blockchain.info is in a good position despite the rising fees - page 2.

pooya87

legendary

Activity: 3472

Merit: 10611

Quote from: Wind_FURY on March 09, 2017, 09:36:53 PM

Since the fees keep rising and the mempool is always flooded because the 1mb blocks are overflowed beyond its confines, I could foresee wallet services making arrangments with Bitcoin merchants, gambling sites and others to make transactions with them through an internal ledger. Settlement will come later on the blockchain.

Blockchain.info is in an excellent position to start this. Soon we'll see recommended merchants inside their wallet.

I want to hear your opinions please.

that is a big ass NO for me. because nothing about this sounds like "bitcoin" to me. blockchain.info is a bad service with bugs and it is unsafe as a web wallet to begin with and adding something like this, although may interest some people i never like it.

if Coinbase or a web wallet like that which is working off-chain and similar to banks offer something like that and it helps adoption (although i don't like that either) i can see it as helpful since it can bring more average Joe and help adoption with merchants also.

Dudeperfect

hero member

Activity: 1190

Merit: 534

I am using blockchain.info since 2014 and I haven't faced any problem yet with them. They provide good service, good infrastructure to transact bitcoins but again, the core essence of bitcoin is that keeping third parties away from the transaction and as even though Blockchain says, "Be your own bank", one has to keep his funds with blockchain.info in order to transact. It's less about blockchain's trust and more about involvement of a third party in the transaction.

RoommateAgreement

hero member

Activity: 770

Merit: 500

Bazinga!

when i started using bitcoin i did it because it was a stand alone decentralized currency that i didn't need anyone to use. this means i build the wallet myself, make the transactions myself and broadcast them myself, and i could even mine them myself long time ago.
apart from mining if we want to start using third parties i think i am just going to use my bank instead. it doesn't have fees in my country. and just keep bitcoin as investment.

U2

hero member

Activity: 676

Merit: 503

I used to be indecisive, but now I'm not sure...

Better yet what we could do is just vote for certain people that would make these decisions for us. They could decide to make more bitcoins, increase the block size, you know, do whatever they want to pretty much. Once that's achieved we're good to go. Wait... this sounds familiar. Oh! Because it's fiat!

Hydrogen

legendary

Activity: 2562

Merit: 1441

Last I heard this is walmart's pricing for wire transfers.

Walmart is MUCH cheaper than their competition, btw.

It makes me wonder if the fuss over "expensive bitcoin transaction fees" is exaggerated and blown out of proportion.

n0ne

hero member

Activity: 2618

Merit: 548

SecureShift.io | Crypto-Exchange

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on March 09, 2017, 09:39:39 PM

Sounds like that would be going in the direction of trusted third parties and away from the original 'distributed consensus' Bitcoin was supposed to be promising.

It looks like an dependence over a third party to overcome the correlation. As they don't support bitcoin unlimited, the prevailing mining difficulty could have forced to come up with such a plan. Even when the fee is high people understand the truth behind I, now for someone it's hard to trust a third party supporting blockchain.info

The_Dark_Knight

hero member

Activity: 840

Merit: 502

Quote from: freebutcaged on March 09, 2017, 09:44:27 PM

All of this to reduce the fees correct? if so then I doubt it if they can sustain in long term. but if they are willing to do this for free why not.

I think what he is proposing is just to keep most transactions out of the blockchain and then settle them after a period of time, as an example lets suppose I send 1 BTC to address A and the owner of address A sends 0.4BTC to address B that I own, what the OP seems to be proposing is that instead of two transactions, we settle the difference and I make a transaction of only 0.6BTC this way there is only one transaction instead of two, do this for many transactions and it could be possible to diminish the number of unconfirmed transactions.

freebutcaged

hero member

Activity: 588

Merit: 541

All of this to reduce the fees correct? if so then I doubt it if they can sustain in long term. but if they are willing to do this for free why not.

AgentofCoin

legendary

Activity: 1092

Merit: 1001

Quote from: Wind_FURY on March 09, 2017, 09:36:53 PM

...
Blockchain.info is in an excellent position to start this. Soon we'll see recommended merchants inside their wallet.
I want to hear your opinions please.

Yes, very likely and probably more appropriate for certain situations.

As for blockchain.info itself, this may interest you:
https://blog.blockchain.com/2016/05/16/announcing-the-thunder-network-alpha-release/

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on March 09, 2017, 09:39:39 PM

Sounds like that would be going in the direction of trusted third parties and away from the original 'distributed consensus' Bitcoin was supposed to be promising.

Most online wallets are already "third parties".
This solution would be for people who wish to transact faster and
"aren't concerned" with Bitcoin's real designed intention and purposes.

jonald_fyookball

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1008

Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political

Sounds like that would be going in the direction of trusted third parties and away from the original 'distributed consensus' Bitcoin was supposed to be promising.

Wind_FURY

legendary

Activity: 2898

Merit: 1823

Since the fees keep rising and the mempool is always flooded because the 1mb blocks are overflowed beyond its confines, I could foresee wallet services making arrangments with Bitcoin merchants, gambling sites and others to make transactions with them through an internal ledger. Settlement will come later on the blockchain.

Blockchain.info is in an excellent position to start this. Soon we'll see recommended merchants inside their wallet.

I want to hear your opinions please.

Topic: Why I think Blockchain.info is in a good position despite the rising fees - page 2. (Read 1181 times)