5 ms·

Those who submitted the transactions _knew_ the transaction fees before submitting. They voluntarily and intentionally paid these fees. This is not broken.

TameAntelope 4y ago
Sorry, but nobody signed up for their transaction to fail, this is a bullshit excuse. > Besides high fees, the transaction load resulted in a bottleneck that resulted in failed transactions that people still had to pay fees for—now in the thousands of dollars for nothing in return, not even an NFT.
- siftrics 4y ago
  Yes they did. They knew that transaction failure is a risk and they accounted for it. I don't feel bad if they did not do their due diligence before attempting to transfer thousands of dollars of ETH.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - db_admin 4y ago
    Why are they [0] offering a return of the gas spent, then? [0] https://twitter.com/yugalabs/status/1520612364839661568 https://twitter.com/yugalabs/status/1520612364839661568
    - tofuahdude 4y ago
      Marketing and brand.
    - siftrics 4y ago
      Because it's profitable for Yuga Labs to do that? They're a business making a business decision. They know users are more likely to participate in the community in the future if Yuga is willing to cover costs out-of-pocket. Again, assess the risks yourself. Assume responsibility for your own actions. Especially in an environment like crypto today.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - NovemberWhiskey 4y ago
    So what you're telling us is, as far as I can see, that if you're someone who might want to execute payments on a time-sensitive basis without accepting the risk of losing huge fees to transactions that fail anyway ... if that is not within your risk appetite ... you better stay away from the Ethereum Mainnet. Right?
- ChrisClark 4y ago
  They obviously did sign up for the transaction to 'fail'. In this case, it just means others paid more for their place in the line than they did. They absolutely picked the price they were willing to pay and lose, in the hopes it was more than the others trying to get a place in line. So yes, they absolutely knew their transaction could fail if others paid more than them.
  - Dylan16807 4y ago
    "fail" here is not just being outbid, but still paying most of the money you bid. That's not acceptable.
- nawgz 4y ago
  This same user is arguing that Crypto is justified because it helps people in dictatorial or corrupt nations protect their money. I really can't stand this hypocrisy - "it's working as intended to drop transactions even after charging exorbitant transaction fees - by the way it also is protecting impoverished people's money". You cannot tell me this is a good-faith argument.
  - siftrics 4y ago
    No one held a gun to their head and said "you have to bet thousands of dollars of ETH." If you want to move lots of money for the purposes of escaping authoritarian regimes, there are other chains which have extremely negligible transaction fees.
  - rglullis 4y ago
    Context matters. - No one is forced to use the blockchain when it is congested. Quite the opposite. The high prices are supposed to be a self-correcting mechanism and to put a back-off signal for all those that can wait. - "holding" assets do not cost anything on the blockchain. - There are ways to dial the "perfomance/cost/decentralization" trade-off knobs. There are off-chain systems to move funds. Use centralized exchanges when possible, and you can avoid paying anything. Pool your resources with people that you can trust/cooperate, and you can have a separate ledger [0] that can abstract the different blockchains into one single "balance" and only interacts with the blockchain when you need to actually move the funds. [0] https://hub20.io/about https://hub20.io/about
    - Scea91 4y ago
      > Pool your resources with people that you can trust/cooperate How do I find this group of people I trust? I suppose you mean a larger group of people than my closest family and a bunch of friends? Can I possibly trust a group of anonymous people on blockchain more than an established physical bank?
      - rglullis 4y ago
        > I suppose you mean a larger group of people than my closest family and a bunch of friends? No. I mean exactly on that scale. It could be friends and family, it could be your employer and your co-workers. It could be you and some members of your church. My recommendation on Hub20 is "don't open an account in any instance unless you and the operator could knock on each other's doors". > more than an established physical bank? Trust is a sliding scale. It's up to you to know how comfortable you'll be by leaving funds on the hands of each.
rtkwe 4y ago
This is broken for anyone attempting to use ETH beyond a speculative asset. Consider if we get into the "crypto wins" future where it takes over as a payment method and replaces/live beside and equal to USD or traditional currencies. People can't just wait hours to buy random things there's a certain amount of transactions that are time sensitive. It's even worse when you think about the future where other record keeping has moved on chain because that too has a certain immediacy. Go to the doctor at the wrong time and suddenly it's thousands of dollars in fees to add to your on-chain medical records.

TameAntelope 4y ago

Sorry, but nobody signed up for their transaction to fail, this is a bullshit excuse. > Besides high fees, the transaction load resulted in a bottleneck that resulted in failed transactions that people still had to pay fees for—now in the thousands of dollars for nothing in return, not even an NFT.

siftrics 4y ago
Yes they did. They knew that transaction failure is a risk and they accounted for it. I don't feel bad if they did not do their due diligence before attempting to transfer thousands of dollars of ETH.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- db_admin 4y ago
  Why are they [0] offering a return of the gas spent, then? [0] https://twitter.com/yugalabs/status/1520612364839661568 https://twitter.com/yugalabs/status/1520612364839661568
  - tofuahdude 4y ago
    Marketing and brand.
  - siftrics 4y ago
    Because it's profitable for Yuga Labs to do that? They're a business making a business decision. They know users are more likely to participate in the community in the future if Yuga is willing to cover costs out-of-pocket. Again, assess the risks yourself. Assume responsibility for your own actions. Especially in an environment like crypto today.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- NovemberWhiskey 4y ago
  So what you're telling us is, as far as I can see, that if you're someone who might want to execute payments on a time-sensitive basis without accepting the risk of losing huge fees to transactions that fail anyway ... if that is not within your risk appetite ... you better stay away from the Ethereum Mainnet. Right?
ChrisClark 4y ago
They obviously did sign up for the transaction to 'fail'. In this case, it just means others paid more for their place in the line than they did. They absolutely picked the price they were willing to pay and lose, in the hopes it was more than the others trying to get a place in line. So yes, they absolutely knew their transaction could fail if others paid more than them.
- Dylan16807 4y ago
  "fail" here is not just being outbid, but still paying most of the money you bid. That's not acceptable.
nawgz 4y ago
This same user is arguing that Crypto is justified because it helps people in dictatorial or corrupt nations protect their money. I really can't stand this hypocrisy - "it's working as intended to drop transactions even after charging exorbitant transaction fees - by the way it also is protecting impoverished people's money". You cannot tell me this is a good-faith argument.
- siftrics 4y ago
  No one held a gun to their head and said "you have to bet thousands of dollars of ETH." If you want to move lots of money for the purposes of escaping authoritarian regimes, there are other chains which have extremely negligible transaction fees.
- rglullis 4y ago
  Context matters. - No one is forced to use the blockchain when it is congested. Quite the opposite. The high prices are supposed to be a self-correcting mechanism and to put a back-off signal for all those that can wait. - "holding" assets do not cost anything on the blockchain. - There are ways to dial the "perfomance/cost/decentralization" trade-off knobs. There are off-chain systems to move funds. Use centralized exchanges when possible, and you can avoid paying anything. Pool your resources with people that you can trust/cooperate, and you can have a separate ledger [0] that can abstract the different blockchains into one single "balance" and only interacts with the blockchain when you need to actually move the funds. [0] https://hub20.io/about https://hub20.io/about
  - Scea91 4y ago
    > Pool your resources with people that you can trust/cooperate How do I find this group of people I trust? I suppose you mean a larger group of people than my closest family and a bunch of friends? Can I possibly trust a group of anonymous people on blockchain more than an established physical bank?
    - rglullis 4y ago
      > I suppose you mean a larger group of people than my closest family and a bunch of friends? No. I mean exactly on that scale. It could be friends and family, it could be your employer and your co-workers. It could be you and some members of your church. My recommendation on Hub20 is "don't open an account in any instance unless you and the operator could knock on each other's doors". > more than an established physical bank? Trust is a sliding scale. It's up to you to know how comfortable you'll be by leaving funds on the hands of each.

rtkwe 4y ago

This is broken for anyone attempting to use ETH beyond a speculative asset. Consider if we get into the "crypto wins" future where it takes over as a payment method and replaces/live beside and equal to USD or traditional currencies. People can't just wait hours to buy random things there's a certain amount of transactions that are time sensitive. It's even worse when you think about the future where other record keeping has moved on chain because that too has a certain immediacy. Go to the doctor at the wrong time and suddenly it's thousands of dollars in fees to add to your on-chain medical records.