3 ms·

I say this unironically: this is good for Bitcoin. In my opinion, the best time for Bitcoin was when it was sitting at around ~$1000, where fees were low, trans

by vivan 9y ago

I say this unironically: this is good for Bitcoin. In my opinion, the best time for Bitcoin was when it was sitting at around ~$1000, where fees were low, transaction times were low and acceptance was high. Bitcoin was a great currency for online transactions back then. Once prices skyrocketed as they did, it lost the ability to function as "Internet money" because it was simply too expensive to use. Fees are high, transactions take hours, and a lot of the companies that famously accepted Bitcoin (Microsoft, Valve) no longer accept it. As someone who regularly made purchases with Bitcoin before the ridiculous growth, I'm hopeful for a return to those times.

sethgecko 9y ago
fees have been as low as 0.5$ for a couple of weeks now
- vivan 9y ago
  Do you have any evidence to back up that claim? All of the data I've seen suggests that the average fees are still $8-10.
  - wyldfire 9y ago
    I've done several transactions over the last week for less than 10 sat/byte, usually less than $0.25 See https://bitcoinfees.earn.com https://bitcoinfees.earn.com for what it looks like now Unfortunately lots of wallets/presets are still recommending the higher fees from when traffic was higher.
    - dagw 9y ago
      How long did you have to wait for confirmation?
      - wyldfire 9y ago
        The most was probably about twenty five minutes, but I was pushing it -- I wasn't in a hurry and I wanted to see how low I could go on the fees.
  - nordsieck 9y ago
    If you want a more nuanced look at bitcoin fees, take a look at the mempool [0]. That way you can see for yourself fees that will probably clear in 1 block, 1 day, etc. [0] dedi.jochen-hoenicke.de/queue
Waterluvian 9y ago
Forgive my ignorance but that makes no sense to me. Things were good when they were good. But Bitcoin has proven to be incredibly unstable. I want my currency to be consistent. My understanding is that currencies like the USD have a central authority that pulls levers and knobs in attempt to make its value consistent across time. What mechanics exist within Bitcoin to do this?
- oscilloscope 9y ago
  Bitcoin isn't really attempting to fulfill the currency use-case anymore. It's pretty much sticking with digital gold. Likewise with Ethereum, the currency is primarily used to run the protocol. Low price volatility is not a pressing design goal for either system. For a token that does have the levers and knobs, check out the Dai whitepaper: https://makerdao.com/whitepaper/DaiDec17WP.pdf https://makerdao.com/whitepaper/DaiDec17WP.pdf
  - jstanley 9y ago
    "Bitcoin" doesn't really "attempt" anything. I attempt to use Bitcoin as a currency, but that doesn't mean you have to.
  - mamon 9y ago
    >> Bitcoin isn't really attempting to fulfill the currency use-case anymore ... because it failed miserably at it, due to technical limitations. Now we hear a story about "digital gold", but you know what that story really is? It's just the people who bought Bitcoin on its historical maximum (near 20k USD) refusing to admit their loss and hoping for a miracle.
    - peoplewindow 9y ago
      They weren't technical limitations. It failed due to problems with its community. They deliberately drove it off a cliff-edge and claimed the new broken Bitcoin was better than the old working Bitcoin.
jasonsync 9y ago
Yes, I think most early Bitcoin supporters would agree that things were much better when transaction fees were low and confirmation times were fast. Bitcoin is worthless if the underlying utility is broken. It's unfortunate that the community wasn't organized enough to come a consensus on "scaling" ... It was only a few months ago that it appeared as though the possibilities were endless. We had excellent "long-term" solutions in development (Segwit and Lightning) AND a good "short-term" fix ready to go (Blocksize increase). As an early adopter I feel betrayed, that we were forced to choose a side, that politics trumped usability. It's toxic. Self-limiting, and difficult to "buy" into at this point.
- RestlessMind 9y ago
  > It's unfortunate that the community wasn't organized enough to come a consensus on "scaling" ... I thought the principle appeal of bitcoin was its decentralized nature. Why do you want to forge a consensus and remove the best feature bitcoin can claim? > ...that politics trumped usability You mean, bitcoin operates in The Real World (tm) operated by humans?
- andirk 9y ago
  The block increase was looked down upon by many, probably the more technical minded, because we were taught that simple constants in equations (block size of 1,2,8...) are not as important as the exponents. However, a 2MB increase on something that was probably arbitrarily 1MB seemed like a fine middle ground until Lightning Network. Then again, hard forks are no fun.

by vivan 9y ago

sethgecko 9y ago

fees have been as low as 0.5$ for a couple of weeks now

vivan 9y ago
Do you have any evidence to back up that claim? All of the data I've seen suggests that the average fees are still $8-10.
- wyldfire 9y ago
  I've done several transactions over the last week for less than 10 sat/byte, usually less than $0.25 See https://bitcoinfees.earn.com https://bitcoinfees.earn.com for what it looks like now Unfortunately lots of wallets/presets are still recommending the higher fees from when traffic was higher.
  - dagw 9y ago
    How long did you have to wait for confirmation?
    - wyldfire 9y ago
      The most was probably about twenty five minutes, but I was pushing it -- I wasn't in a hurry and I wanted to see how low I could go on the fees.
- nordsieck 9y ago
  If you want a more nuanced look at bitcoin fees, take a look at the mempool [0]. That way you can see for yourself fees that will probably clear in 1 block, 1 day, etc. [0] dedi.jochen-hoenicke.de/queue

Waterluvian 9y ago

Forgive my ignorance but that makes no sense to me. Things were good when they were good. But Bitcoin has proven to be incredibly unstable. I want my currency to be consistent. My understanding is that currencies like the USD have a central authority that pulls levers and knobs in attempt to make its value consistent across time. What mechanics exist within Bitcoin to do this?

oscilloscope 9y ago
Bitcoin isn't really attempting to fulfill the currency use-case anymore. It's pretty much sticking with digital gold. Likewise with Ethereum, the currency is primarily used to run the protocol. Low price volatility is not a pressing design goal for either system. For a token that does have the levers and knobs, check out the Dai whitepaper: https://makerdao.com/whitepaper/DaiDec17WP.pdf https://makerdao.com/whitepaper/DaiDec17WP.pdf
- jstanley 9y ago
  "Bitcoin" doesn't really "attempt" anything. I attempt to use Bitcoin as a currency, but that doesn't mean you have to.
- mamon 9y ago
  >> Bitcoin isn't really attempting to fulfill the currency use-case anymore ... because it failed miserably at it, due to technical limitations. Now we hear a story about "digital gold", but you know what that story really is? It's just the people who bought Bitcoin on its historical maximum (near 20k USD) refusing to admit their loss and hoping for a miracle.
  - peoplewindow 9y ago
    They weren't technical limitations. It failed due to problems with its community. They deliberately drove it off a cliff-edge and claimed the new broken Bitcoin was better than the old working Bitcoin.

jasonsync 9y ago

Yes, I think most early Bitcoin supporters would agree that things were much better when transaction fees were low and confirmation times were fast. Bitcoin is worthless if the underlying utility is broken. It's unfortunate that the community wasn't organized enough to come a consensus on "scaling" ... It was only a few months ago that it appeared as though the possibilities were endless. We had excellent "long-term" solutions in development (Segwit and Lightning) AND a good "short-term" fix ready to go (Blocksize increase). As an early adopter I feel betrayed, that we were forced to choose a side, that politics trumped usability. It's toxic. Self-limiting, and difficult to "buy" into at this point.

RestlessMind 9y ago
> It's unfortunate that the community wasn't organized enough to come a consensus on "scaling" ... I thought the principle appeal of bitcoin was its decentralized nature. Why do you want to forge a consensus and remove the best feature bitcoin can claim? > ...that politics trumped usability You mean, bitcoin operates in The Real World (tm) operated by humans?
andirk 9y ago
The block increase was looked down upon by many, probably the more technical minded, because we were taught that simple constants in equations (block size of 1,2,8...) are not as important as the exponents. However, a 2MB increase on something that was probably arbitrarily 1MB seemed like a fine middle ground until Lightning Network. Then again, hard forks are no fun.