4 ms·

> secure an international low cost payment network That's something which is actually handled fine in fiat, believe it or not. Nor is Bitcoin "low cost": Even

by mpyne 12y ago

> secure an international low cost payment network That's something which is actually handled fine in fiat, believe it or not. Nor is Bitcoin "low cost": Even with the price in the dumps recently a Bitcoin transaction still averages about $10 per transaction. Nor can Bitcoin feasibly handle international commerce, given that it's still capped in theory to 7 transactions per second, and in practice to 2-3 transactions per second, and this total capacity also has to support non-remittance transfers such as the normal exchange hackings (like BTER today) and SatoshiDice (which can take up about half of all Bitcoin protocol capacity on some days).

unabridged 12y ago
>a Bitcoin transaction still averages about $10 per transaction. How does this make it not low cost? Transferring that $10 still only costs $.02 >capped in theory to 7 transactions per second Not 7 transactions but 7 settlements per second, which clear in under 60 minutes. You can have as many binding transactions per second as you want off the chain.
- inoop 12y ago
  > How does this make it not low cost? Transferring that $10 still only costs $.02 Assuming max TPS rate of 3tps, a 10-minute block will contain 3 * 60 * 10 = 1800 transactions. Each block generates 25btc, which is equivalent $6125 at the current $245 price. Each transaction therefore costs $6125 / 1800 = $3.40. Of this only a small amount is paid for the by the person who creates the transaction, the rest of paid for by those who hold Bitcoin.
  - mpyne 12y ago
    > Of this only a small amount is paid for the by the person who creates the transaction, the rest of paid for by those who hold Bitcoin. I always find it ironic that the illusion of low fees per transaction in Bitcoin is subsidized by the ongoing inflation of the money supply. Apparently inflation is acceptable when it helps evangelize the product you're trying to sell, but it's not acceptable monetary policy in any other situation.
- mpyne 12y ago
  > Not 7 transactions but 7 settlements per second, which clear in under 60 minutes. You can have as many binding transactions per second as you want off the chain. If you're willing to engage in transactions off-chain then you might as well use PayPal or other fiat. The blockchain and the protocol surrounding its maintenance is central to Bitcoin and its philosophy, it's not merely some 'nice-to-have' feature that should be jettisoned as soon as it becomes inconvenient. After all, the blockchain is the one and only authoritative Bitcoin ledger, everything else in Bitcoin is an IOU, no matter how sensible it might seem, which is why Bitcoin itself will reject a transaction if it's not included into a mined block in time. And either way, way to ignore the in-practice 2-3 transaction per second limit.
atom-morgan 12y ago
> That's something which is actually handled fine in fiat, believe it or not How? Are we comparing transaction fees?
A_COMPUTER 12y ago
>That's something which is actually handled fine in fiat, believe it or not. Not if you're Wikileaks. Bitcoin was (probably) built to solve the kind of problems they had getting money transferred to them. there's a cost associated with a low-trust network.
- ufo 12y ago
  Since bitcoin has a public ledger, its possible to envision a system where the authorities punish anyone that sends bitcoin to addresses controlled by wikileaks or accepts bitcoins from them.
  - thanksgiving 12y ago
    Can the authorities force me to confirm or deny my control of any given bitcoin wallet though?
    - ufo 12y ago
      They can use "rubber hose" crypto to interfere with your bitcoin usage. The point is that the lack of anonymity is a bad thing when you are facing against a powerful adversary.

by mpyne 12y ago

unabridged 12y ago

>a Bitcoin transaction still averages about $10 per transaction. How does this make it not low cost? Transferring that $10 still only costs $.02 >capped in theory to 7 transactions per second Not 7 transactions but 7 settlements per second, which clear in under 60 minutes. You can have as many binding transactions per second as you want off the chain.

inoop 12y ago
> How does this make it not low cost? Transferring that $10 still only costs $.02 Assuming max TPS rate of 3tps, a 10-minute block will contain 3 * 60 * 10 = 1800 transactions. Each block generates 25btc, which is equivalent $6125 at the current $245 price. Each transaction therefore costs $6125 / 1800 = $3.40. Of this only a small amount is paid for the by the person who creates the transaction, the rest of paid for by those who hold Bitcoin.
- mpyne 12y ago
  > Of this only a small amount is paid for the by the person who creates the transaction, the rest of paid for by those who hold Bitcoin. I always find it ironic that the illusion of low fees per transaction in Bitcoin is subsidized by the ongoing inflation of the money supply. Apparently inflation is acceptable when it helps evangelize the product you're trying to sell, but it's not acceptable monetary policy in any other situation.
mpyne 12y ago
> Not 7 transactions but 7 settlements per second, which clear in under 60 minutes. You can have as many binding transactions per second as you want off the chain. If you're willing to engage in transactions off-chain then you might as well use PayPal or other fiat. The blockchain and the protocol surrounding its maintenance is central to Bitcoin and its philosophy, it's not merely some 'nice-to-have' feature that should be jettisoned as soon as it becomes inconvenient. After all, the blockchain is the one and only authoritative Bitcoin ledger, everything else in Bitcoin is an IOU, no matter how sensible it might seem, which is why Bitcoin itself will reject a transaction if it's not included into a mined block in time. And either way, way to ignore the in-practice 2-3 transaction per second limit.

atom-morgan 12y ago

> That's something which is actually handled fine in fiat, believe it or not How? Are we comparing transaction fees?

A_COMPUTER 12y ago

>That's something which is actually handled fine in fiat, believe it or not. Not if you're Wikileaks. Bitcoin was (probably) built to solve the kind of problems they had getting money transferred to them. there's a cost associated with a low-trust network.

ufo 12y ago
Since bitcoin has a public ledger, its possible to envision a system where the authorities punish anyone that sends bitcoin to addresses controlled by wikileaks or accepts bitcoins from them.
- thanksgiving 12y ago
  Can the authorities force me to confirm or deny my control of any given bitcoin wallet though?
  - ufo 12y ago
    They can use "rubber hose" crypto to interfere with your bitcoin usage. The point is that the lack of anonymity is a bad thing when you are facing against a powerful adversary.