91
92

Fees at 4k satoshis/kB ?! What's going on? (i.redd.it)

joelthelion が 投稿

全 152 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]-johoe [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

Someone is pushing large transactions with high fee. For example https://blockchain.info/tx/5b93feda9184356515b3d056776d6c752fe75fb66bcbf41a078cfb8661a4b4bb

There were similar transactions last Monday but not as many and not with that high fee.

[–]killerstorm [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Plenty of these transactions in this block: https://blockchain.info/block/000000000000000000e879c5a7bcbfd0005e43b751f10c8253cb17be829cf4b9

They all pay 0.1 BTC fee and collect a large number of inputs into one output with a round number of bitcoins (e.g. 25 BTC). I really don't see how this could happen naturally.

This looks very artificial to me.

[–]Seccour [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Roger Ver confirmed.

[–]danielsun174 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Russian hacker confirmed.

[–]sumBTC [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

*400k satoshis/kB

[–]llortoftrolls [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

It's Monday

[–]joelthelion[S] [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Has it been that high though? I've seen 150, but this is more than twice as much...

[–]muyuu [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

http://i.imgur.com/xpYL1v0.png

[–]PabloDon [スコア非表示]  (37子コメント)

Yeah I just sent someone bitcoin and didn't realize my ledger nano s added a $10 fee :( http://image.prntscr.com/image/0c58ca8f479c4856bf07585291bc21ce.png

edit: this was the transaction https://blockchain.info/tx/3d10ee88fb817084208b75847dd6b749956fc8e2be6a532fb6fe11c64537127b

[–]trilli0nn [スコア非表示]  (10子コメント)

That's bad. Wallets should warn if the fee becomes unusually high and/or more than let's say 10% of the value of the transaction. Wallets should advise to wait a bit.

E-mail the Ledger Nano guys :-)

[–]Taek42 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

I'd be pretty upset if it didn't warn me at 1%. If the is more than a dollar I'm going to be more careful about how I spend my btc.

[–]eatmybitcorn [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

Yes flashing red sign "FEES HAS CANCER TODAY, please try again tomorrow!"

Bitcoin 2017 the future of money?

[–]firstfoundation [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Yeah, scarcity equals CANCER. Love you guys but can you make it any clearer that you don't want what Bitcoin actually is?

[–]0x48454C4C4F00 [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

whats high?
10cent is a meal in some countries, $10 in other.

[–]trilli0nn [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

Lol... are you trying to defend a $10 transaction fee? Seriously?

[–]0x48454C4C4F00 [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

in no way, but it's hard to warn when fees are 'too high' because whats the definition of that?

[–]Taek42 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

I'd suggest 1% of the transaction value should trigger a warning, 10% a very bold warning.

[–]Schizo-Vreni [スコア非表示]  (6子コメント)

Holy shit 10$?? That doesnt make any sense even with the current fees. What was your transaction size?

[–]btchip [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

do you have the txid ?

[–]PabloDon [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

https://blockchain.info/tx/3d10ee88fb817084208b75847dd6b749956fc8e2be6a532fb6fe11c64537127b

[–]btchip [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

ok, we're not monitoring the backend but that seems really weird - we'll have a look at the fee estimation reported by our different nodes.

[–]PabloDon [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Thanks please do. It would probably be a good idea to show the USD value not just for the amount but also for the fee

[–]JackBond1234 [スコア非表示]  (8子コメント)

Wasn't the low fee supposed to be a major selling point for Bitcoin?

[–]abdada [スコア非表示]  (7子コメント)

No, that was a major selling point of doofuses a few years ago who think Bitcoin should replace Western Union.

[–]oscarandjo [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

doofuses

As someone who only occasionally visits /r/bitcoin, but very much likes the idea of Bitcoins. This response/subthread here completely puts me off Bitcoin.

I make transfers of £100s regularly through my bank account and they don't get any fees whatsoever as long as they are within the UK. Why the fuck would I use Bitcoin if it had a £10 fee for a £100 transaction? It's less supported, has no customer support, has no assurances/coverage and I'm far more likely to fuck up and lose them.

Even for foreign transfers the fees are tiny compared to that.

I think you are being the doofus, what possibility is there that people will use Bitcoin if transaction fees are this high?

[–]abdada [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

I think you are being the doofus, what possibility is there that people will use Bitcoin if transaction fees are this high?

I'm part of the bitcoin as gold club, not the bitcoin as pennies.

Transaction fees are CURRENTLY high because bitcoin is immature and the market hasn't developed fully. I do NOT look at bitcoin as a great solution right now, today, for most people. I look at bitcoin as a great solution LONG TERM as the market matures.

Bitcoin is still growing in what it can do. Right now what bitcoin does that almost no other investment vehicle can do is that it isn't hyperinflationary like any other currency. Even gold is pseudoinflationary in some ways -- miners reduce mining when gold's price is low, but they know they can mine more when the price is high. Bitcoin miners can not adjust their mining to mine more or less than the actual math allows overall.

So Bitcoin today is just a great long term investment vehicle to get in with the idea that the big risk is if the markets will find solutions to these issues. I personally believe offchain settlements will fix bitcoin but this will mean...banks. I have zero issues with banks themselves -- gold banks were real and you had to pay a fee to use them, unless you loaned your gold out for interest paid. Bitcoin can be the same, and I'd have no issue with it -- let offchain banks settle between each other and guarantee payments, and let people loan bitcoin out to each other if they want to avoid paying a fee to banks for securing the balances.

People are demanding that they want to "be their own banks" but they don't want to pay fees for those that handle securing the blockchain? Fuck them. Useless people with short term views.

I buy US$100-US$150 a week in bitcoin. If I spend bitcoin, I replace it. I don't care about the fees right now because I think the long game is going to be very, very beautiful for early adopters. I've been buying bitcoin since it was US$12 or so and will continue to buy weekly if it's US$5000 or US$400. Doesn't matter to me.

Once the market succeeds at resolving these short term concerns, bitcoin will blossom. If it fails, I lose my investment of $8000 a year or whatever. No big deal for me. Worth the risk.

[–]reddit_trader [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Transaction fees are CURRENTLY high

I don't see how they will decrease in the future, though?

[–]irrational_actor2 [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

I would love to know when it was decided Bitcoin was not capable of replacing Western Union. I personally still believe it is.

[–]abdada [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Bitcoin will replace Western Union when companies come up to do that.

Western Union, if you aren't aware, isn't a currency. It's a third party that uses currencies. Right now, Western Union uses their own network that is instantaneous, safe and works all over the world. Bitcoin needs third party support, but because it's so immature, it isn't getting as much support as is needed for it to be ubiquitous.

The thing is, I use Bitcoin ALL THE TIME with third parties to avoid transaction issues. For example: I always try to keep some BTC value in Gyft so I can instantly buy gift cards if needed. I bought a travel gift card onboard a cruise ship in a foreign country recently using BTC and it was instant and perfectly timed.

Third parties is what makes bitcoin usable. Being your own bank is a retarded idea because banking isn't just about securing commodities and being able to transfer them quickly and cheaply. There's more to it than that.

Bitcoin will mature in time, and I don't think it will require much change to the code to do it. It will just take trusted feedback in markets.

[–]irrational_actor2 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Yawn. So that is the end of peer to peer cash and we need companies to transfer our bitcoin across borders. This sub in cancer.

[–]abdada [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

You need companies to transfer your bitcoin across borders already. They're called miners.

Are YOU mining? I'm not -- it's too expensive and the fees I pay to miners is well worth it to avoid having to mine.

[–]spamcop1 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

I think trezor force you to double check fee, if its high

[–]btchip [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Only that the max fee per byte is not set to a ridiculously high value - it doesn't help much if you have to check a high-ish fee considering the current exchange rate.

[–]pos_terior [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

TX ID or it didn't happen.

[–]boomtnt46 [スコア非表示]  (40子コメント)

Spoiler: the fee is that high because of the small block size.

[–]hairy_unicorn [スコア非表示]  (12子コメント)

Spolier: The Chinese miners are holding up a 2MB scaling solution that is ready right now by not signalling for SegWit.

[–]dangit779redditor for 7 days [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

4MB is ready for about 2 years now... stop warping reality please

[–]hairy_unicorn [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

If the blocksize had been raised to 4MB 2 years ago, bitcoin could have run into a serious brick wall.

That's because of the quadratic relationship between block size and signature verification time. An attacker would be able to cripple the network by creating endless nasty transactions like this one at low cost.

[–]boomtnt46 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Hardware also is improved over time. There isn't any reason to not upgrade to 2MB blocks. I don't even say 4MB, maybe the would be necessary in 5 years.

[–]labeller [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

4mb blocks aren't a real solution. Segwit is. Stop warping reality please

[–]squarepush3r [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

could be a network spam attack

[–]GibbsSamplePlatter [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

4 sat/byte? That's... nothing?

edit: oh, 400 sat/byte, not 4. Title is screwed.

[–]MinersFolly [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

I see Roger Ver has recharged his asshole-spam wallet.

What a jackhole.

[–]jahanbin [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

don't be a troll. Stop blaming people. We need to come together as a community and figure this out or Bitcoin will not survive.

[–]Schizo-Vreni [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

where can you find that graph?

[–]jacobthedane [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Priority fee in mycelium is strange its 1.5 USD with normal fee being 20 Cents.

[–]yogibreakdance [スコア非表示]  (22子コメント)

We can end this bs right here right now by voting for segwit

[–]HowRiskyIsDatClick [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

I'm doing my part!

[–]DajZabrij [スコア非表示]  (19子コメント)

SW + 2Mb would be nice compromise

[–]Miz4r_ [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

It's easier and makes much more sense to activate SW first, preparing a proper hardfork requires more time and would also be safer to do once SW is active.

[–]bitking74 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Yes but then at least Bitcoin core should give their word that they will offer the hard fork next

[–]waxwing [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

SW is 2MB (roughly), right now.

[–]Swarleys29 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

SW is the compromise, if you don't see it you don't want to see the problems that one side is talking about, but SW is an onchain scaling (more than BU) because is the foundation for a proper way increase in capacity for the future in the network, and other improvements, and will relieve the situation that we have right now. BU will not take in consideration the problems that the other side is seeing and will make it worse because exacerbate it...

So SW is a compromise for the problems with the onchain scaling, in size and capacity increase to a max of 4M, and BU is not making any compromise plus bringing a risk of 2 chains...

[–]satoshicoin [スコア非表示]  (13子コメント)

SW is the compromise. A hardfork will take a year to prepare safely. SegWit could be activated in two weeks if the miners would stop playing games and start signalling for it.

[–]hairy_unicorn [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

The /r/btc brigade is here to downvote the truth again.

[–]0x48454C4C4F00 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

A hardfork will take a year to prepare safely.

this debatte is here since 2013, so we had enough time for preparation.

[–]Explodicle [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Preparing for as-yet-unmerged proposals (that might not even happen) is a lot of extra work. Bitcoin should decide what's changing, set it in stone with a lead time, and THEN everybody downstream updates. I'm not going to prepare for every unfinished idea that gets assigned a BIP number.

[–]BitttBurger [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

A hardfork will take a year to prepare safely.

Then maybe we should've started preparing for it back when Gavin and everyone else was asking you guys to do exactly that… 3 years ago.

[–]satoshicoin [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

It wasn't safe to do so back then because of the quadratic-time sigops problem. Hard forking to a larger blocksize back then would have left the system vulnerable to crippling DOS attacks. SegWit fixes that problem.

[–]routefire [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

By leaving it small you open the network to another kind of DOS attack. All that millions worth of hardware backing bitcoin isn't worth much when a few thousand dollars are sufficient to cripple the network with spam.

There's all this talk of why we need to keep bitcoin "decentralized" and small to protect against (what some consider) to be inevitable state sponsored attacks. Well, the easiest attack vector is still open. They did the same thing to Tor - never went after them with a warrant, just paid a bunch of researchers to try and see if they could break it.

[–]akira_fmx [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

Better start preparing for the fork a year ago when you signed the Hong Kong agreement.

[–]killerstorm [スコア非表示]  (13子コメント)

Bitcoin Unlimited marketing campaign?

They boasted they have $100M to kill a small block chain, it's conceivable they can spend a couple of millions on "marketing". With that kind of budget outs easy to outbid everyone for block space.

They already have 25% of hashrate, and they can easily add several more Chinese pools to get to 50%, at which point a fork can happen.

Obscene fees can be used as a casus belli. Like, "we have to act to save the network"

[–]MrHodl [スコア非表示]  (6子コメント)

If people are willing to pay high fights why is the network in need of saving?

[–]killerstorm [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

The network is alright, but an average user probably thinks that "something needs to be done" about outrageously high fees, and so businesses can easily justify switching to Unlimited, like "users were demanding that" or "we couldn't tolerate the fees".

[–]bitusher [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Businesses have more than 2 choices however , segwit is the third choice to provide temporary lower fees.

[–]killerstorm [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

I'm talking about scenario where a majority of miners are pushing BU hard fork. Since it's a hard fork, they also need to convince businesses to adopt it. Miners can't do that on their own.

If there was a super-majority of miners supporting SegWit we wouldn't have needed support from businesses. But such super-majority doesn't exist now, so it's not the scenario worth considering.

[–]bitusher [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Yes, but almost no business openly supports BU, because its not really a viable option, miners have no real intention in supporting it, and it is merely being used as a tool to force a second compromise. Yes, I could be wrong about the bluff, but at this point I really don't care if BU gets 51% , I am prepared to dump my split BU coins and rebuy back the original chain if needed to show the miners they miscalculated the economic majority.

[–]ricco_di_alpacaredditor for 2 months [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

It's far cheaper than hiring a competent developer team for BU.

[–]Bitcoinaire1989 [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Maybe more people just want to use the network.

If you look at the rate of adoption over the past couple of years it isn't surprising that we have reached this point.

PS: I am a Segwit/Lightning supporter so please refrain from accusations about me peddling BU

[–]killerstorm [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

There some very unusual transactions in blocks during the spike, this looks very artificial.

E.g. in this block: https://blockchain.info/block/000000000000000000e879c5a7bcbfd0005e43b751f10c8253cb17be829cf4b9

You can see many large transactions which collect large number of inputs into a single output with round number of bitcoins (e.g. 25 BTC), and all of them pay 0.1 BTC fee.

I don't think there is any way to explain that as a normal user activity.

These transactions are also present in later blocks, e.g.:

E.g. in block #451826 there is a a 43258 byte transaction with many inputs and a single 25 BTC output which pays 0.1 BTC fee. 231 satoshi/byte.

In block #451829 there is a 66260 byte transaction which collect a lot of inputs into a 25 BTC output and pays 0.1 BTC fee.

In block #451825 there is a 31903 byte transaction with one 25 BTC output and 0.1 BTC fee.

How do you explain this?

[–]_jstanley [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

An exchange or other business moving user deposits into manageable chunks? My business does similar transactions, albeit on a much smaller scale.

[–]muyuu [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

There is no Chinese conspiracy. They are not any more in agreement than the rest.

[–]Lite_Coin_Guy [スコア非表示]  (7子コメント)

we want lower fees. BU wants lower fees. would be good time to activate SW if you dont follow a hidden agenda :)

[–]gr8ful4 [スコア非表示]  (5子コメント)

you think that 75% of the network follow a hidden agenda?

[–]waxwing [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

75% of the hash rate is heavily influenced by a few people that have a not-hidden agenda to take political power over Bitcoin (in particular, away from its open source development process).

The conspiracy theorists on the other hand can be found in other places ...

[–]gr8ful4 [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

What exactly is an open source development process? And how is it endangered by various teams working on different (sometimes controversial) aspects of the Bitcoin software?

IMO this is what open source is all about!? What's your definition of open source?

[–]waxwing [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

I was talking about miners, not developers. Developers trying to push alterations to the consensus rules has been going on for years, that's not what's new here.

[–]gr8ful4 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

AFAIK miners are still free to choose the software they want to run and tweak the code and recompile for themselves.

IMO Bitcoin was as political as anything on earth can get from day one. So I am not astonished, that politics and influence is now a big thing in Bitcoin land. Bitcoin is about to change the world - how couldn't it be politicized if it's such a powerful tool?

[–]wuzza_wuzza [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

75% of a small cadre of pool operators != The Network. The network is way larger than than than and is made of up the economic majority.

[–]severact [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

The miners make more money if fees are higher. There is nothing hidden in that agenda. The argument that "lower fees will broaden adoption and thus increase the btc price even more" is a tough one to make when both fees and prices are increasing.

[–]piugattuk [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Bah, bitcoin was going to revolutionize money...now it's headed in the direction of fee's similar to bank transactions...guess when humans are involved greed and corruption is inevitable.

[–]blackmarble [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

Stagnation.

[–]hairy_unicorn [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

Price elasticity of demand for a scarce resource.

[–]i0X [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Artificially scarce.

[–]_lemonparty [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Not artificial. The larger the blocksize, the longer are the transmission times, the longer it takes to validate a block (which has a quadratic relationship to block size), and the more centralization pressures are applied to Bitcoin. A centralized Bitcoin is useless to everybody.

So - no, not artificially scarce.

[–]blackmarble [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

That would be true if there were no limit in place. Then it would be a market determined scarcity. With a static limit it is definitely artificial scarcity, a ceiling on production of blockspace.

[–][削除されました]  (3子コメント)

[deleted]

    [–]joelthelion[S] [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

    Mmm, the fee estimator is usually quite robust to variance. I've been observing it for months and never saw anything like this.

    [–][削除されました]  (1子コメント)

    [deleted]

      [–]muyuu [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

      Transaction fees per block around 1 BTC right now.

      At some point, fees will need to overtake the block reward for the network to be sustainable. Which is why most transactions will have to happen off-chain eventually (in side chains or something of the sort ideally, only with consolidating transactions in the main blockchain).

      [–]CosmosKing98 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

      Supply vs demand for a artificially limited block size.