5 ms·

This is a PR stunt. Average transaction fees on the bitcoin network are approaching $5. That prices a huge swath of the population out of the network. A dire

This is a PR stunt. Average transaction fees on the bitcoin network are approaching $5. That prices a huge swath of the population out of the network. A direct result of the small block policy so forcefully advocated by blockstream affiliates.

eyezick 9y ago
Scalability too. You could even boast a crazier achievement like a full node capable of running on every smart-phone, but the potential is handcuffed as the network can only handle ~7 transactions a second.
- pmorici 9y ago
  Yup, it's nuts. They have turned it into a ultra luxury car. Any one can view one only a privleged few can afford to drive.
- nadaviv 9y ago
  Not all transactions has to be on the main chain. Scaling will happen on top and to the sides of bitcoin, using sidechains, extension chains, off-chain payment solutions like Lighting and TumbleBit, and new solutions that we haven't thought of yet.
icebraining 9y ago
How much does Western Union charge to send a few hundred dollars to some country with poor Internet connectivity? And how much does it cost to travel to the nearest post? Nobody's paying for a coffee cup with this, but if you can send a chunk of cash and trade for local currency in one (or few) transactions, it might still make sense.
- candiodari 9y ago
  To spend the money once received ? Zero ...
- colordrops 9y ago
  What does that have to do with Blockstream's small block agenda? The fees are too high and don't need to be compared to existing shitty solutions.
  - icebraining 9y ago
    I don't mean it relatively to the small blocks, but to the satellite.
  - kobeya 9y ago
    Blockstream has made pretty clear that they (as a company) don't have a position or agenda with respect to the block size.
- stephengillie 9y ago
  I was a Western Union operator 10 years ago. Back then it was $15 for every $100 you were sending. Today, they have much cheaper options, though every transaction looks to take several days.[0] Amusingly, their Price Estimator [1] continuously reloads with adblockers enabled. [0] http://onlinefx.westernunion.com/Fees http://onlinefx.westernunion.com/Fees [1] https://www.westernunion.com/us/en/price-estimator/continue.html https://www.westernunion.com/us/en/price-estimator/continue....
  - icebraining 9y ago
    Seems like Wire Transfer is the only option that covers all countries, and it's $22. That's much better than $15 per $100, but still higher than current Bitcoin fees, even with two transactions. Of course, it also depends on the exchange rates you can get, not just on the transaction fees.
jbg_ 9y ago
Meanwhile, the average transaction value is approaching $40,000. $5 suddenly doesn't sound so terrible. Both of those figures are pulled high by exceptionally valuable and exceptionally large transactions, respectively, of course. Medians might be a better statistic, for which the figures are around $700 (median transaction value) and $1.50 (median transaction fee).
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
quickthrower2 9y ago
I recently sent 1btc with a 3c txn fee. Successfully. To btc-e couple of hours before it went offline. :(
- andruby 9y ago
  I sent a transaction of 0.6btc 16 hours ago with 0.00022 BTC fee. Still has 0 confirmations. that's almost 1 dollar in fees. Another transaction with 0.00055 BTC fees did get picked up, after spending a couple hours in the mempool.
  - nadaviv 9y ago
    The amount you're sending is irrelevant, bitcoin charges you by the size of your transaction in bytes (that is, by the number and complexity of inputs/outputs your transaction has).
    - andruby 9y ago
      that's true. both transactions were 226 bytes. The first transaction that still hasn't confirmed had a fee of 100 sat/B, and the other about 250 sat/B.
  - lathiat 9y ago
    What happens if no one ever picks it up.. like; is the transaction in limbo forever and at some point someone could just mine it so you have no idea if it will ever go through? Or is there some kind of expiration.
    - nadaviv 9y ago
      It'll eventually (around 3-4 days at most) be evicted from the mempool of enough network nodes so that you'll be able to send a conflicting transaction (spending the same inputs) and get it mined instead.
nadaviv 9y ago
I regularly send payments with 5c-10c in fees and it works just fine. Sometimes takes a bit longer, if we're in a high-demand period or going through a spam attack[0]. The "small block policy" view[1] is held by nearly every technical participant of the bitcoin space[2][3], myself included. Claiming that blockstream are somehow "forcing" anything is pure conspiracy nonsense. [0] https://bravenewcoin.com/news/bitcoin-spam-attack-stressed-network-for-at-least-18-months-claims-software-developer/ https://bravenewcoin.com/news/bitcoin-spam-attack-stressed-n... [1] that is, the "let's start by doubling the blocksize with segwit first, analyze the results and then talk about further increasing it" view. not sure how valid the "small block" label is, considering that the people you're labeling with it want to double the block size. [2] https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Segwit_support#Developers https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Segwit_support#Developers [3] https://bitcoincore.org/en/segwit_adoption/ https://bitcoincore.org/en/segwit_adoption/
xorcist 9y ago
That's misleading. Many transactions are many payments baked in a gigantic transaction, these tend to be big with a high fee. That and other applications drive up the average a lot. Normal users don't have to pay $5. Some wallets do still have broken or easily games fee estimations (Blockchain's is notorious. Armory broke down completely.) That is a problem that should have been fixed already but can only be adressed by their respective developers. However, even at $.5 many use cases are priced out of the network. On chain gambling most notably. This problem is inherent to the extreme replication factor trustless global systems require and is definitively not something that is advocated one way or another.

eyezick 9y ago

Scalability too. You could even boast a crazier achievement like a full node capable of running on every smart-phone, but the potential is handcuffed as the network can only handle ~7 transactions a second.

pmorici 9y ago
Yup, it's nuts. They have turned it into a ultra luxury car. Any one can view one only a privleged few can afford to drive.
nadaviv 9y ago
Not all transactions has to be on the main chain. Scaling will happen on top and to the sides of bitcoin, using sidechains, extension chains, off-chain payment solutions like Lighting and TumbleBit, and new solutions that we haven't thought of yet.

icebraining 9y ago

How much does Western Union charge to send a few hundred dollars to some country with poor Internet connectivity? And how much does it cost to travel to the nearest post? Nobody's paying for a coffee cup with this, but if you can send a chunk of cash and trade for local currency in one (or few) transactions, it might still make sense.

candiodari 9y ago
To spend the money once received ? Zero ...
colordrops 9y ago
What does that have to do with Blockstream's small block agenda? The fees are too high and don't need to be compared to existing shitty solutions.
- icebraining 9y ago
  I don't mean it relatively to the small blocks, but to the satellite.
- kobeya 9y ago
  Blockstream has made pretty clear that they (as a company) don't have a position or agenda with respect to the block size.
stephengillie 9y ago
I was a Western Union operator 10 years ago. Back then it was $15 for every $100 you were sending. Today, they have much cheaper options, though every transaction looks to take several days.[0] Amusingly, their Price Estimator [1] continuously reloads with adblockers enabled. [0] http://onlinefx.westernunion.com/Fees http://onlinefx.westernunion.com/Fees [1] https://www.westernunion.com/us/en/price-estimator/continue.html https://www.westernunion.com/us/en/price-estimator/continue....
- icebraining 9y ago
  Seems like Wire Transfer is the only option that covers all countries, and it's $22. That's much better than $15 per $100, but still higher than current Bitcoin fees, even with two transactions. Of course, it also depends on the exchange rates you can get, not just on the transaction fees.

jbg_ 9y ago

Meanwhile, the average transaction value is approaching $40,000. $5 suddenly doesn't sound so terrible. Both of those figures are pulled high by exceptionally valuable and exceptionally large transactions, respectively, of course. Medians might be a better statistic, for which the figures are around $700 (median transaction value) and $1.50 (median transaction fee).

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

quickthrower2 9y ago

I recently sent 1btc with a 3c txn fee. Successfully. To btc-e couple of hours before it went offline. :(

andruby 9y ago
I sent a transaction of 0.6btc 16 hours ago with 0.00022 BTC fee. Still has 0 confirmations. that's almost 1 dollar in fees. Another transaction with 0.00055 BTC fees did get picked up, after spending a couple hours in the mempool.
- nadaviv 9y ago
  The amount you're sending is irrelevant, bitcoin charges you by the size of your transaction in bytes (that is, by the number and complexity of inputs/outputs your transaction has).
  - andruby 9y ago
    that's true. both transactions were 226 bytes. The first transaction that still hasn't confirmed had a fee of 100 sat/B, and the other about 250 sat/B.
- lathiat 9y ago
  What happens if no one ever picks it up.. like; is the transaction in limbo forever and at some point someone could just mine it so you have no idea if it will ever go through? Or is there some kind of expiration.
  - nadaviv 9y ago
    It'll eventually (around 3-4 days at most) be evicted from the mempool of enough network nodes so that you'll be able to send a conflicting transaction (spending the same inputs) and get it mined instead.

nadaviv 9y ago

I regularly send payments with 5c-10c in fees and it works just fine. Sometimes takes a bit longer, if we're in a high-demand period or going through a spam attack[0]. The "small block policy" view[1] is held by nearly every technical participant of the bitcoin space[2][3], myself included. Claiming that blockstream are somehow "forcing" anything is pure conspiracy nonsense. [0] https://bravenewcoin.com/news/bitcoin-spam-attack-stressed-network-for-at-least-18-months-claims-software-developer/ https://bravenewcoin.com/news/bitcoin-spam-attack-stressed-n... [1] that is, the "let's start by doubling the blocksize with segwit first, analyze the results and then talk about further increasing it" view. not sure how valid the "small block" label is, considering that the people you're labeling with it want to double the block size. [2] https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Segwit_support#Developers https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Segwit_support#Developers [3] https://bitcoincore.org/en/segwit_adoption/ https://bitcoincore.org/en/segwit_adoption/

xorcist 9y ago

That's misleading. Many transactions are many payments baked in a gigantic transaction, these tend to be big with a high fee. That and other applications drive up the average a lot. Normal users don't have to pay $5. Some wallets do still have broken or easily games fee estimations (Blockchain's is notorious. Armory broke down completely.) That is a problem that should have been fixed already but can only be adressed by their respective developers. However, even at $.5 many use cases are priced out of the network. On chain gambling most notably. This problem is inherent to the extreme replication factor trustless global systems require and is definitively not something that is advocated one way or another.