5 ms·

No, the maintainers have purposely neutered its usability in favor of it becoming a "digital gold" or a "digital reserve". Fees are far to high for common uses

No, the maintainers have purposely neutered its usability in favor of it becoming a "digital gold" or a "digital reserve". Fees are far to high for common uses, and this is entirely intentional. If you are looking for usable crypto currencies, you should look at Ethereum, Bitcoin Cash, Monero, or many others who have set up their chains to accommodate actual day to day use.

sillysaurusx 6y ago
Isn't it a myth that fees are too high? $0.05 seems to get you in and verified within an hour, if I remember correctly.
- dangwu 6y ago
  Waiting more than a few minutes eliminates all in-person, food delivery, and probably most same-day delivery transactions. Who’s going to wait an hour for the purchase to go through for an Uber Eats or Prime Now delivery?
  - Zarath 6y ago
    A vast majority of transactions don't need to wait for a full confirmation, simply existing in the mempool is enough. Just like my electric bill doesn't need to wait for the ACH transfer to complete before it's considered paid.
    - dangwu 6y ago
      The blockchain has no support for this kind of feature. That's rather antithetical to Bitcoin. How do you propose to achieve this without a central bank figure?
      - xur17 6y ago
        The "blockchain" doesn't need to support this - the GP's point is that transactions don't need to irrevocably settle for all transaction types. If you're spending $5 to buy coffee, the chance that you are going to defraud the store is low, and there are a number of less complex ways you could accomplish this anyways (just take the item off the shelf, and leave without paying). And I'll note that there are other ways to accept bitcoin payments without high fees or long wait times (lightning).
        dangwu 6y ago
        I strongly disagree. I think you are overestimating the morality of the common man. If you enable anonymous purchasing of items with no proof of funds being sent, it will be abused. A lot. No storefront will sign up for this. This is very different than physical shoplifting.
        xur17 6y ago
        It's not anonymous if you're standing in the store paying..
        dangwu 6y ago
        It's anonymous enough if you never reveal your identity. It would be like driving somewhere, paying cash, then later the cash is revealed to be fake. And there's no way for the storefront to test for legitimacy until an hour later.
        xur17 6y ago
        So, like credit cards (could be stolen, chargeback risk, etc).
        dangwu 6y ago
        1. Credit card fraud is an extremely small percentage of credit card activity. What you are proposing would likely not be. 2. Chargebacks are disputed, and as a storefront you can prove that you are not liable. Merchants can review the identifying documents of the cardholder for legitimacy and take other security steps, like using a chip-enabled card terminal, to further confirm the validity of the purchase. If they follow the process correctly, they are not liable for fraudulent purchases, the cardholder’s issuing bank is. Visa and MasterCard’s contracts generally put the burden of fraud reimbursement onto the bank.
        X6S1x6Okd1st 6y ago
    - xur17 6y ago
      And I'd argue that credit card transactions don't settle for somewhere ~90 days (if even then).
      - joshstrange 6y ago
        But that's because a company is extending credit to you, the customer, that money is being deposited next day or a few days at most into the merchant account. Without someone willing to be left holding the bag (credit card company) it's a bit of apples and oranges I think.
        xur17 6y ago
        When credit card fraud occurs, I can assure you that it's the merchant taking the hit, not the credit card company.
        joshstrange 6y ago
        That’s fine, it doesn’t change the fact it’s apples and oranges. There is no way to claw back money in BTC.
- beervirus 6y ago
  You’re off by a factor of 50. https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/bitcoin-transactionfees.html#3m https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/bitcoin-transactionfees...
  - vmception 6y ago
    or you just spend once to make a lightning connection and spend for much less and faster? or use any other blockchain?
    - beervirus 6y ago
      Yes, there are indeed other options. Like cash or a credit card.
      - vmception 6y ago
        people write to blockchains for more reasons than payments. there are equivalent costs in dollars to perform this action, which I thought we were talking about here. lightning has limited utility though! does have lower tail end costs
  - X6S1x6Okd1st 6y ago
    Median looks a bit better ($1.17 for last value, compared to $1.92) both are far from $0.05
- chipperyman573 6y ago
  They haven't been that low in a long time. Current fees are about $2-3 https://www.blockchain.com/charts/fees-usd-per-transaction https://www.blockchain.com/charts/fees-usd-per-transaction
  - sillysaurusx 6y ago
    Average != actual, though. You can pay whatever fee you want. I'm pretty sure that if you set a fee of $0.10, your transaction will be verified much sooner than you might think. It would be interesting to quantify, at least.
    - robjan 6y ago
      For most transactions, not being included in the next block is unacceptable.

sillysaurusx 6y ago

Isn't it a myth that fees are too high? $0.05 seems to get you in and verified within an hour, if I remember correctly.

dangwu 6y ago
Waiting more than a few minutes eliminates all in-person, food delivery, and probably most same-day delivery transactions. Who’s going to wait an hour for the purchase to go through for an Uber Eats or Prime Now delivery?
- Zarath 6y ago
  A vast majority of transactions don't need to wait for a full confirmation, simply existing in the mempool is enough. Just like my electric bill doesn't need to wait for the ACH transfer to complete before it's considered paid.
  - dangwu 6y ago
    The blockchain has no support for this kind of feature. That's rather antithetical to Bitcoin. How do you propose to achieve this without a central bank figure?
    - xur17 6y ago
      The "blockchain" doesn't need to support this - the GP's point is that transactions don't need to irrevocably settle for all transaction types. If you're spending $5 to buy coffee, the chance that you are going to defraud the store is low, and there are a number of less complex ways you could accomplish this anyways (just take the item off the shelf, and leave without paying). And I'll note that there are other ways to accept bitcoin payments without high fees or long wait times (lightning).
      - dangwu 6y ago
        I strongly disagree. I think you are overestimating the morality of the common man. If you enable anonymous purchasing of items with no proof of funds being sent, it will be abused. A lot. No storefront will sign up for this. This is very different than physical shoplifting.
        xur17 6y ago
        It's not anonymous if you're standing in the store paying..
        dangwu 6y ago
        It's anonymous enough if you never reveal your identity. It would be like driving somewhere, paying cash, then later the cash is revealed to be fake. And there's no way for the storefront to test for legitimacy until an hour later.
        xur17 6y ago
        So, like credit cards (could be stolen, chargeback risk, etc).
        dangwu 6y ago
        1. Credit card fraud is an extremely small percentage of credit card activity. What you are proposing would likely not be. 2. Chargebacks are disputed, and as a storefront you can prove that you are not liable. Merchants can review the identifying documents of the cardholder for legitimacy and take other security steps, like using a chip-enabled card terminal, to further confirm the validity of the purchase. If they follow the process correctly, they are not liable for fraudulent purchases, the cardholder’s issuing bank is. Visa and MasterCard’s contracts generally put the burden of fraud reimbursement onto the bank.
        X6S1x6Okd1st 6y ago
  - xur17 6y ago
    And I'd argue that credit card transactions don't settle for somewhere ~90 days (if even then).
    - joshstrange 6y ago
      But that's because a company is extending credit to you, the customer, that money is being deposited next day or a few days at most into the merchant account. Without someone willing to be left holding the bag (credit card company) it's a bit of apples and oranges I think.
      - xur17 6y ago
        When credit card fraud occurs, I can assure you that it's the merchant taking the hit, not the credit card company.
        joshstrange 6y ago
        That’s fine, it doesn’t change the fact it’s apples and oranges. There is no way to claw back money in BTC.
beervirus 6y ago
You’re off by a factor of 50. https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/bitcoin-transactionfees.html#3m https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/bitcoin-transactionfees...
- vmception 6y ago
  or you just spend once to make a lightning connection and spend for much less and faster? or use any other blockchain?
  - beervirus 6y ago
    Yes, there are indeed other options. Like cash or a credit card.
    - vmception 6y ago
      people write to blockchains for more reasons than payments. there are equivalent costs in dollars to perform this action, which I thought we were talking about here. lightning has limited utility though! does have lower tail end costs
- X6S1x6Okd1st 6y ago
  Median looks a bit better ($1.17 for last value, compared to $1.92) both are far from $0.05
chipperyman573 6y ago
They haven't been that low in a long time. Current fees are about $2-3 https://www.blockchain.com/charts/fees-usd-per-transaction https://www.blockchain.com/charts/fees-usd-per-transaction
- sillysaurusx 6y ago
  Average != actual, though. You can pay whatever fee you want. I'm pretty sure that if you set a fee of $0.10, your transaction will be verified much sooner than you might think. It would be interesting to quantify, at least.
  - robjan 6y ago
    For most transactions, not being included in the next block is unacceptable.