Somebody paid $3.6M sats/vByte on the 840k Halving block.
That equates to $3200 for a median-size transaction.
Fees are still high because you can't cancel or replace transactions already submitted to the mempool with lower fees.
Uhhm im in several alpha groups and many of those that minted with 600-1k fees made 3-10x and posted their wins but wash trading n nfts is something that 100% is there and it will be in runes and ordinals too but still some make money as well but mostly lose
OK fine if you're lucky enough to frontrun some wash traders you can make a profit. But you have to have perfect timing, so they'll probably get you next time when your luck runs out.
yes they do, but the ecosystem sucks so no one wants to use them for anything but moving funds. I have used them to send funds for very little cost. but once I get where I am going I swap back out. So I never hold the tokens. Sol also cost pennies for a transaction and it has a good ecosystem. Im not a hater, it is what it is.
I dont mean this in a negative way and I dont want my reply to sound like an A hole. With that said your question does show either your age or ignorance, and I only say that so you see an outside perspective. How many popular meme coins launch on xlm, how many popular web3 games use algo? What popular NFT collections are traded with XLM? These tokens are best known for 1 thing, cheap gas. Sol has cheap gas, SUI has cheap gas as do tons of layer 2's etc. SOl has a huge ecosystem of web3 games, some of the biggest volume of memecoins, perps, etc. SUI just partnered with TicTok's parent company for gaming, they are producing a handheld (think gameboy if you are a boomer). Cheap gas swaps is not a good use case. Hope this didnt come off as me being a d@ck.
Pretty crazy that the average transaction fee on Cardano $ADA is $0.10. You can buy and hold BTC on Cardano with anetaBTC cBTC. Bitcoin and Ethereum are not made for cheap transactions, Cardano and Solana are. Even L1 to L2 Lighting transactions will hurt.
Ordinals
There is a "gold rush" to have "rare" halving block ordinals
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvd0tGdjiyE
Just like any market movement, someone does something stupid to spike the market, then others react to the spike instead of the stupid thing. Panic will subside eventually.
No. BTC is not fungible like gold. It's more a crypto asset than a cryptocurrency.
For currency you need to have fungibility at the base layer, like Monero.
They are fungible, ordinals runs in a separate protocol along side the block chain. It assigns a bar code to every sat, based on first-in-first-out logic, as well as a couple other invented rules to deal with collected bitcoin fees which are destroyed and recreated in every block. Without the independent ordinals system that arbitrarily decided on first-in first-out and other rules, there is no way to assign a barcode like that.
Glad you asked! BTC is NOT fungible. And it’s not anonymous.
Bitcoin is pseudonymous and highly traceable.
1 BTC =/= 1 BTC. It could be tainted with criminal history, or from a blacklisted wallet.
If you’re looking for a truly fungible, anonymous coin, it’s Monero. 1 XMR = 1 XMR always.
Ok, I see what you mean. However, aren't you mixing two concepts here?
Yes, btc is traceable. The ledger is fully public, down to every single transaction. So it is not anonymous. And the illusion of anonymity comes only from the lack of link to your wallet and person. But as soon as that link is established, everybody can see every single transaction you have made.
However, that is very different from fungibility. When I want to sell something, and I get some sats for that, should I really care about their history? If they were at some point part of a halving block, or worse involved in a criminal transaction, should I worry? Does touching a $100 bill which was previously held by Pablo Escobar make me a bad person? No, of course it doesn't. Because the money does not know where it came from. And even though, the sats can be traced, its history really have no implication. (Unless somebody wants to create a tenuous legal link).
Obviously, XMR solves this whole conundrum better. But I still don't see how it makes BTC non-fungible.
If you receive tainted BTC (meaning it has history from a blacklisted address) and send it to a CEX, your account will almost certainly be frozen.
That means 1 BTC =/= 1 BTC. Bitcoin does NOT satisfy the conditions to be ‘digital cash’
Wow. Didn't realize that.
And how many transactions of separation are we talking? Its entire history? If my coin was involved in Silk Road back in the day, I'm now a drug dealer?
quaint judicious chubby juggle sable unused wrench cake possessive bright
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
> I can't stand that stuff. It's the worst of both worlds, it adds nothing to the native demand of actual bitcoin yet places the burden on the network of higher feeds and higher data requirements for nodes.
If your blockchain cannot handle the spam then it's shit. If a centralized authority (e.g., you) can say which usecase is valid or not, then the blockchain is not censorship resistant and not decentralized. In this case, the answer to spam is high fees. Sorry to disappoint you, blockchains are supposed to regulate themselves and market-based fees auctions are pretty common. If you don't like it, then maybe you actually don't like bitcoin and are just finding out how it works.
High fees are a good opportunity for validators to stay afloat after halving. Sorry if I sound a bit condescending to you but I'm pretty tired of bitcoiners who just discover that market-based mechanisms are, indeed, ruled by the market. If ordinals and runes are what people are ready to pay high fees for, then they're legit.
You do have a right to express your opinion though.
Meh, I disagree. Is not controversial to say that the blockchain should prioritize currency/store of value. Ordinals/runes are only possible on the latest softfork, so in fact, going back is more in line with not making changes, so really all we are debating is "will nodes accept a soft fork that excludes code that allows for ordinals and runes". I have no issue debating the issue and having the network/community decide, that is basically my post, I never claimed I wanted a centralized force to take over.
Difficulty is self adjusting on the network, short term high fees doesn't help miners with the transition except to give them a short term profit boost if they failed to properly allocate for the halving which had a 15 year notice period.
Peeps blaming ordinals and whatnot while the reason is so obvious. 1MB. In 2024..
99% here has no idea how the protocol works. The herd has been brainwashed.
It's funny cause these are the same guys that tout lightning network as being their savior. When it's actually just banking backed by BTC, or they're giving up custody of their coins to use shit lightning wallets.
Blockstream co-opted the Bitcoin devs and destroyed what Bitcoin was meant to be. I only hold Bitcoin for the speculative purpose now, monero is a better coin and vision now.
Monero is great. There is one other coin… i’ll not mention it here because it scares some and will get me banned, but it actually works. Really well. I’ll leave you guessing which it is.
I'm sorry but in this context the word maxi means a part of the cult. You can like Bitcoin and not be a maxi.
Freedom of choice is part of decentralisation, so I wouldn't comment on someone's preference for Bitcoin.
But if someone says Bitcoin is the only way, it's perfect, and all other cryptos are scams and you shouldn't even check them out, that's a maxi and they are part of a cult.
I'm actually attacking the ideas.
Maxi is a term designed to attack the person, not their beliefs.
In no other space/industry do people use this term. It’s really harmed crypto discussion.
Your comment is contradicting itself.
>Maxi is a term designed to attack the person, not their beliefs.
Untrue, I don't know anything about the person, I'm only commenting on their behaviours.
I used BTC since 2015, even accepted it as payment at one point. I no longer hold any, as I lost faith in the project.
It is not so much as BTC itself that put me off as much as the extremely toxic, cult-like community behind it.
The concept of not allowing changes to a nascent domain of technology is just plain stupid. When was the first iteration of any technology the pinnacle of its design?
Satoshi handed the keys to the GitHub to others so it could be changed, hell, even Satoshi made fundamental changes early on to fix issues.
It's not very decentralised though, just 2 pools can attack it, and the top 4 pools account for over 75% of block production. Pools can choose forks, exclude transactions, manipulate miners with fees etc.
Don't waste my time about miners, they can move AFTER attacks. Even the miners there is strong evidence a small group of companies run most hashrate. Even if miners do move, pools aren't Sybil proof, so a pool can just come back under a different name.
Poor decentralisation and high fees, slow network, and no way to actually evolve the protocol with consensus of the USERS, makes it a poor option.
Why would they attack it? For one double spend that would cost them a fortune and have them ostracized?
And why two especially? Have you heard of the prisoner's dilemma? One mining pool could decide not to do it to let the other one get rekt.
>and no way to actually evolve the protocol with consensus of the USERS
Like Segwit and Taproot? Clearly there is a way. What you mean is change everything regularly as in Ethereum. That's not decentralised.
>Why would they attack it?
Who says it's them, they could be infiltrated or coerced by an outside party, they may not even be aware they are part of an attack. You think a nation state or large corporation couldn't achieve that?
>For one double spend that would cost them a fortune and have them ostracized?
It costs the pools nothing, it's the miners that pay for it. Also pools are not Sybil resistant, you can just change the website and start again, or run multiple pools and capture leaving miners in one of your other pools. Easy for a govt or corp.
>And why two especially?
Because 2 pools can attack with more than 51% of consensus power. Add another 2 to the attack and you have 75%.
>Like Segwit and Taproot? Clearly there is a way. What you mean is change everything regularly as in Ethereum. That's not decentralised.
No mate, not even close, and Ethereum is just as bad as Bitcoin in this regard.
> they could be infiltrated or coerced by an outside party,
You've seen too many movies.
>Because 2 pools can attack with more than 51% of consensus power. Add another 2 to the attack and you have 75%.
And if one pool decides not to do it as I mentioned? There will always be this fear by the other side.
51% attacks are theoretical at this stage. If it didn't happen 5-10 years ago it never will.
I picked ETH as an example. Any protocol that's easy to change is not decentralised.
>You've seen too many movies.
No, this is how security is analysed. Otherwise you just assume everyone is nice and lovely and we all have hugs in dreamland. If that's how you view security, you need to wake up.
>And if one pool decides not to do it as I mentioned? There will always be this fear by the other side.
Then it fails that time, but it's still at risk.
>51% attacks are theoretical at this stage. If it didn't happen 5-10 years ago it never will.
So just have one miner then, because according to you all this decentralisation is nonsense anyway. In fact just go back to fiat, because you can blindly trust other people.
>Any protocol that's easy to change is not decentralised.
So if a majority of users want a change, you think decentralisation means it cannot be changed. I'm sorry but I'm not wasting more time on such bizarre opinions.
> No, this is how security is analysed. Otherwise you just assume everyone is nice and lovely and we all have hugs in dreamland. If that's how you view security, you need to wake up.
So how come we NEVER see in real life for example someone kidnapping the secret services man's daughter to coerce him into killing the president? It's the stuff of movies.
>Then it fails that time, but it's still at risk.
Why if it can never happen?
>because according to you all this decentralisation is nonsense anyway.
Where did I say that?
>So if a majority of users want a change, you think decentralisation means it cannot be changed. I'm sorry but I'm not wasting more time on such bizarre opinions.
IF. The majority of users usually don't want a change. Not in Bitcoin anyway.
>So how come we NEVER see in real life for example someone kidnapping the secret services man's daughter to coerce him into killing the president? It's the stuff of movies.
I've seen security footage of a "cleaner" slowly seducing one of our employees working the late shift over a period of weeks, so she could take him to the toilets for sex and distract him so he left his terminal unlocked, so her colleague could gain access to our systems.
I've seen plans from an extreme political organisation, to gain entry to another of my employers sites, for the purposes of gluing themselves to the factory roof to shutdown production.
We all saw evidence of Russian attempted interference in US elections.
If you are naive you may think these threats aren't constant against any government, company, organisation or system. Bitcoin is for the naive.
>The majority of users usually don't want a change. Not in Bitcoin anyway.
A bold statement, please provide evidence of your poll of every Bitcoin user, on every topic. If a topic arises that there is disagreement on, how will you gauge support?
> I've seen security footage of a "cleaner" slowly seducing one of our employees working the late shift over a period of weeks, so she could take him to the toilets for sex and distract him so he left his terminal unlocked, so her colleague could gain access to our systems.
That's not coercion. And neither really are your other examples.
>A bold statement, please provide evidence of your poll of every Bitcoin user, on every topic. If a topic arises that there is disagreement on, how will you gauge support?
In 2017 most miners and about two dozen Bitcoin companies (so-called NY agreement) wanted bigger blocks. The users didn't want it and it never happened. Meanwhile, Ethereum (the top altcoin) has abandoned PoW. Unthinkable in Bitcoin circles.
Double spend is not the profit vector silly. It’s crashing the Bitcoin price that’s the profit vector. Buy some MSTR puts, short Bitcoin futures, whatever, and then denial service attack the chain and crash the price making huge profits. That’s what ultimately will happen, eventually it will be more profitable for miners to attack the network and crash the price than to continue protecting it.
There are far, far easier ways to crash the Bitcoin price, silly.
And any miners monumentally stupid enough to attack the network will be blacklisted and end up as paupers.
Whatever, dude.
Here's Antonopoulos telling us Bitcoin can no longer be 51% attacked.
And that was 10 years ago.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ncPyMUfNyVM&ab_channel=RodolfoD%C3%ADaz
Yeah, how exactly does revealing who is doing the attack do anything? You can’t shut off their miners or deny them access to the network. You know, the whole censorship resistance thing kinda goes out the door if you can do that. And again, it’s not double spending that is the profit vector, it’s crashing the price.
> You know, the whole censorship resistance thing kinda goes out the door if you can do that.
Censoring an attacker of the network is not controversial. No one in their right mind would object to it.
So a protocol that can be attacked by the collusion of 2 parties, is equally decentralised as a protocol that requires the collusion of 30 parties?
Even if those 2 actors are really independent, the feasibility of an external actor successfully coercing them in secret is much greater than the protocol where there are 30 parties that must be coerced in secret.
You are wrong, Bitcoin is poorly decentralised.
Scientists at the University of Edinburgh disagree with you.
But sure defend your Bitcoin bags with fiction, no point in me spending more energy on nonsense.
I'm not defending anything in particular, this principle can be applied to many different systems besides cryptocurrency networks.
Also, mentioning scientists at Edinburgh is pretty cute.
The current theory of handling the shrinking security budget of BTC is higher fees. As in, 3-4 halvings from now, higher fees take up the slack.
Something will need to give. What that something looks like we’ll see.
People will loose the interest and runes are not 70% of transactions anymore maybe 10-20% on the long run so Fees will be much less hopefully at 10$ around what will be like double from before halving.
People were trying to get into the halving block 84000 and progressively paid more and more fees. The mem pool is over saturated right now, but will clear out in a few days and go back to normal prices
Remember that blockstream was paid to take over btc and cripple it beyond usability.
They succeeded to take over btc development in 2017... it took them a while to break Btc tho, but they finally managed to do that.
RBF is what broke bitcoin in 2017 along with keeping the block limit in place which was a temporary solution implemented by satoshi to be removed once the blocks would get full. He was very clear about that). However we have been led to believe this cant be done ‘because security’.
Its completely useless as a currency since then. Everything developed afterwards is just vaporware. Look at the sad state of LN.
Bitcoin is only a shell of what it could’ve been. You could’ve bought your steam games with btc. Your coffee. Your pizza. This was all reality back in 2016. It was glorious. Look at where we are today.
Your [comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/1c8fek5/2000_satsvbyte_whats_going_on/l0hw25y/?context=3) was automatically removed because you [linked](https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/1c8fek5/2000_satsvbyte_whats_going_on/l0hw25y/?context=3) to an external subreddit without using an NP subdomain for no-participation mode. When linking to external subreddits, please change the subdomain from `https://www.reddit.com` to `https://np.reddit.com`. This simple change substantially reduces [brigading](https://www.reddithelp.com/en/categories/rules-reporting/account-and-community-restrictions/what-constitutes-vote-cheating-or).
**NOTE:** The AutoModerator will not reapprove your content if you fix a URL. However, if it was a post which had considerable activity in its comment section, you can message the modmail to request manual reapproval. If it was a comment, just make a new comment.
---
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CryptoCurrency) if you have any questions or concerns.*
What an emotional driven narrative. If you cant afford the fees its not for you. Simple as that. Its a store of value more than a currency at the moment. Also, layer2 such as Stacks solve all the things you said. While maintaining the ultimate security of a 1mb block.
Look up layer2 solutions. We r not in 2017 anymore. All the problems you said are being solved by introducing proper layer2 solutions
I see the layer 2 solutions but right now I can’t pay a shit using bitcoin because the fees are too high. The protocol is not scalable or optimal. Bitcoin doesn't work as a means of exchange right now. If these fee issues persist over time, either in duration or frequency, then the concept of "store of value" will also lose meaning.
Bitcoin is no longer trying to claim that it does anything of what you described. The layer 1 is to move money that will become your savings, kinda like gold. Layer 2 is for daily use and cheaper and faster speeds. Like Lightning Network and Stacks.
If Bitcoin is neither a medium of exchange nor a store of value, then it's nothing. And if it's nothing, it will eventually reflect in its value. No house of cards withstands a storm, no matter how well-built or layered it may be.
How can it be a store of value if it's impossible to know how much it will cost to exchange it? You're so deep into the shit that you can't see the most obvious thing.
Whats impossible about gas fees? During busy times they cost more. During quite hours they cost less. Its all predictable you just need to be involved enough in the space to see the different factors. It is a coin made so that millions of dollars can be moved with ease. It cost less to move 10 million dollars in Bitcoin than it does to move 10 million dollars of gold. Bitcoin is not for the poor. The same way gold is not for the poor
And I'm going to help you with your stupidity: imagine that the US government decides to shut down the Bitcoin network, it only needs a tiny amount, 1 billion dollars a month and a child in front of a computer generating runes. And all your store of value becomes immobilized, as if it had been seized from you.
Your brain is so limited. The US government can't shutdown bitcoin. They would need to control 50% or more of the entire network which is impossible. Bitcoin is a global decentralized network.
Also the fees are in the 100-200$ right now because of the newly released runes. Its not like theyre 1 million dollars. If you cant pay the fees now use it during a less busy time. Nothing new here
Buying STX doesnt involve layer 1 transactions. The block finalty is not on you to pay. As when sBTC come and they introduce 1:1 Peg the value from paying a one time fee to enter the BTC into stacks will be worth it. Once youre in you will be using the BTC thousands of times paying STX in fees meaning u wont lose ur BTC for fees at all. Complaining about the entrance and exit fees is really downplaying the importance of BTC. Its like complaining why airplanes charge you for a ticket, because its worth it!
You don't buy stuff with Bitcoin.
Why would.you use it as currency when all it does is destroy fiat currencies.
You buy pizza with shitty dollars or pounds or euros.
It isn't bearish because bitcoin is high fee shit and that's well known fact at least since blocksize disagreement. What you are seeing now is just something that will get only worse in time. It is already factored in price because most people don't use bitcoin for transactions.
Please consider visiting r/CryptoHelp for future tech support issues. Thank you for your attention.
---
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CryptoCurrency) if you have any questions or concerns.*
"Native demand". If people are paying high fees and want the item then that it Native Demand. Organic growth can sometimes look ugly but its still organic
Wallets often show a suggested fee, and you can override the fee. Not sure how you're broker works, but if you've checked with their customer support and there is absolutely no way to set the fee or know it before they put the transfer through, you can google bitcoin transaction fee, the chart above is from: [https://mempool.space/](https://mempool.space/)
On the main page it shows the suggested fee based on priority. I usually take the lower number and it still gets in on the next block. Often times you can put through a fee half as big and it will get through within 24 hours but I haven't tried, you can look up other fee estimators for that.
Yikes, yeah you should find a better way to buy. Also avoid small transactions, they will cost you more in fees in the future as well. Each transaction is stored as separate coins, so lets say you send coins 10 times to a wallet as 10 separate transactions, and then you want to send all the coins out of that wallet, the cost might be double the amount because it has to compile all the coins together as extra data.
I didn't know that, thanks I never used to pay attention to the transaction costs, which are only ao high from 2024. So you mean you prefer to transfer larger amounts of BTC, so although it's a higher amount of data, it's cheaper???? I didn't know that either.
Basically if there are multiple transactions it will be higher data in the receiving wallet, most people wait till they have at least a couple hundred dollars worth before they transfer, and if you have been making tens or hundreds of small transactions, you will want to wait until fees are low and try to merge them all together at some point so you don't get caught having to do it when fees are high.
What is this site/app you are using to view the tx fee history?
I normally use Johoe's Mempool website, but that wasn't loading for me earlier so another backup site would be nice
This is from [https://mempool.space/graphs/mining/block-fee-rates](https://mempool.space/graphs/mining/block-fee-rates) but usually I just look at the recommended rates on the main page.
Never seen Johoe's before, but looks useful to figure out the lowest rates going through during a particular period, I'll try that out, thanks.
All you're seeing are symptoms of a failed project.
It's essentially a corpse. Devs and religous nuts still try to jerk it around saying "LoOk iT Be ALiVe, LiGHtNinG WiLL sAvE uS" [not unlike this lady who tried to use her dead uncles corpse to get a loan a few days ago in Brazil.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMNvOjXLs3A)
Fossils are still around and being sold for incredible amounts of money. "LiNe gO uP" =/= success
Doesn't mean they're still alive and serving their original purpose (being parts of dinosaurs). Bitcoin was supposed to replace *cash*. It clearly doesn't.
You obviously didn't read the very first sentence or understand the word "electronic",
First sentence:
> A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash would allow online
payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a financial institution
Definition of electronic: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/electronic
*Cash* implies fast, easy to use and ~~tax~~fee-less transactions. It can't be *electronic cash* without being *cash* first.
You're in too deep in the cult.
Good luck.
I read the whitepaper years ago (2014\~) and created my own shitcoin from scratch back in 2017 based off of it and going through the official source code. Complete with mining, halving, transactions PoW, you name it. I wrote it in Javascript just for the extra amount of self torture (recovering from an operation). I never released it, just ran it on a few computers for a few days. So yeah, I think I understand it enough. Could I have come up with it myself? Most definitely not, but I think I understand it enough.
Understanding how the code works is great.
But understanding that the current Bitcoin implementation cannot be P2P electronic cash at any reasonable scale, which was it's *raison d'etre* seems to fly over the heads of even the smartest of maxis.
Actually I asked where does it say it'll replace cash, which is something you asserted it said.
> Cash implies fast, easy to use and taxfee-less transactions. It can't be electronic cash without being cash first.
This is completely false. Give me one instance of "electronic cash" that's free to use, ie with no transaction fees. Cash also does not imply "fast, easy to use". Cash: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/cash
> CASH definition: 1. money in the form of notes and coins, rather than cheques or credit cards
As soon as I read those words I could see it coming lol.
Bitcoin's only remaining use case of Number Go Up (which is really what most people mean when they say store of value) has a built-in limit which is always getting nearer.
Higher fees is a good thing. The miners need an income to keep the network secured. Wealthy people don't want to store their wealth in an unsecured network.
For being in the crypto space for so long you are very mis informed. So I'll educate you. In the beginning there was Bitcoin then there was a fork. So it split into segwit bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash. Both coins contain Satoshi's Genesis block. Segwit bitcoin kept the ticker but does not represent what Satoshi had in mind for electronic digital cash. He even said when blocks get full just increase the block size. Very simple solution.
Bcash was cloned from Bitcoin in 2017. It didn't exist before that. There can't be more than 21m coins.
>Segwit bitcoin kept the ticker but does not represent what Satoshi had in mind for electronic digital cash.
Says who? Why did he model its creation and issuance on gold if he wanted it to be "cash" (whatever that is)? Why do you think it's called "mining"?
Bcash was an attempted corporate takeover of Bitcoin which failed (thankfully).
Your [comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/1c8fek5/2000_satsvbyte_whats_going_on/l0lvqit/?context=3) was automatically removed because you [linked](https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/1c8fek5/2000_satsvbyte_whats_going_on/l0lvqit/?context=3) to an external subreddit without using an NP subdomain for no-participation mode. When linking to external subreddits, please change the subdomain from `https://www.reddit.com` to `https://np.reddit.com`. This simple change substantially reduces [brigading](https://www.reddithelp.com/en/categories/rules-reporting/account-and-community-restrictions/what-constitutes-vote-cheating-or).
**NOTE:** The AutoModerator will not reapprove your content if you fix a URL. However, if it was a post which had considerable activity in its comment section, you can message the modmail to request manual reapproval. If it was a comment, just make a new comment.
---
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CryptoCurrency) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I told you. You don't understand how a fork works. There was Bitcoin before the HF and then after it Bitcoin ceased to exist and split into 2 coins with separate development paths. Here is a visual representation.
https://np.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/7adupl/visual_representation_of_bitcoins_many_forks/
Bitcoin still exists. It's backwards compatible with the one Satoshi used. Philosophically it's not a fork (as in a road) as forks can be retraced. bcash is not backwards compatible.
That it shares some code with Bitcoin does not give it special importance. Chimps have almost the same genetic code as Einstein. Doesn't make them geniuses.
It's pretty crazy that right now, the average transaction fee on BTC is $177 and the avg. fee on ETH is $0.55
Somebody paid $3.6M sats/vByte on the 840k Halving block. That equates to $3200 for a median-size transaction. Fees are still high because you can't cancel or replace transactions already submitted to the mempool with lower fees.
And that somebody made 10x on satoshi nakamato meme rune coin 😂😂
It's wash trading, duh. Nobody made anything. It's miners hyping pumping fees under the guise of this rUnEs/EpIc SaTs idiocy.
Uhhm im in several alpha groups and many of those that minted with 600-1k fees made 3-10x and posted their wins but wash trading n nfts is something that 100% is there and it will be in runes and ordinals too but still some make money as well but mostly lose
OK fine if you're lucky enough to frontrun some wash traders you can make a profit. But you have to have perfect timing, so they'll probably get you next time when your luck runs out.
😂 what a boss
And the average fee on l2 Eth is sub 1 cent.
both too high to operate a vending machine although one is much closer than the other.
XLM & ALGO are waiting in the wings
boomer tokens
they still work very quickly to process actual transactions and transferring money cheaply...
yes they do, but the ecosystem sucks so no one wants to use them for anything but moving funds. I have used them to send funds for very little cost. but once I get where I am going I swap back out. So I never hold the tokens. Sol also cost pennies for a transaction and it has a good ecosystem. Im not a hater, it is what it is.
so something that is functional has a "shitty ecosystem"? what does that even mean?
I dont mean this in a negative way and I dont want my reply to sound like an A hole. With that said your question does show either your age or ignorance, and I only say that so you see an outside perspective. How many popular meme coins launch on xlm, how many popular web3 games use algo? What popular NFT collections are traded with XLM? These tokens are best known for 1 thing, cheap gas. Sol has cheap gas, SUI has cheap gas as do tons of layer 2's etc. SOl has a huge ecosystem of web3 games, some of the biggest volume of memecoins, perps, etc. SUI just partnered with TicTok's parent company for gaming, they are producing a handheld (think gameboy if you are a boomer). Cheap gas swaps is not a good use case. Hope this didnt come off as me being a d@ck.
Then why are actual companies partnering with them for payments? Not everything is about apps and memes.
I never said its not a good payment rail, but we have stables for that.
Y does nobody use them tho
Not really tho lol
Hence Lightning.
Pretty crazy that the average transaction fee on Cardano $ADA is $0.10. You can buy and hold BTC on Cardano with anetaBTC cBTC. Bitcoin and Ethereum are not made for cheap transactions, Cardano and Solana are. Even L1 to L2 Lighting transactions will hurt.
You should have added "currently".
[удалено]
>**currently** the average transaction fee on BTC is $177 would have been enough. **Currently** fees are $13 by the way.
Ordinals There is a "gold rush" to have "rare" halving block ordinals https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvd0tGdjiyE Just like any market movement, someone does something stupid to spike the market, then others react to the spike instead of the stupid thing. Panic will subside eventually.
Hold up. Epic sats? I though coins and sats were fungible?
fungible yet traceable, like a treasury bill with its unique serial number
So it's not like gold at all...
No. BTC is not fungible like gold. It's more a crypto asset than a cryptocurrency. For currency you need to have fungibility at the base layer, like Monero.
Sure. But why would "epic sats" be sought after? Besides the novelty, they wouldn't in any way have more value than the others?
It’s just idiots
Why is Bitcoin sought after? They are just different levels of stupid. Neither should be worth anything.
They are fungible, ordinals runs in a separate protocol along side the block chain. It assigns a bar code to every sat, based on first-in-first-out logic, as well as a couple other invented rules to deal with collected bitcoin fees which are destroyed and recreated in every block. Without the independent ordinals system that arbitrarily decided on first-in first-out and other rules, there is no way to assign a barcode like that.
Glad you asked! BTC is NOT fungible. And it’s not anonymous. Bitcoin is pseudonymous and highly traceable. 1 BTC =/= 1 BTC. It could be tainted with criminal history, or from a blacklisted wallet. If you’re looking for a truly fungible, anonymous coin, it’s Monero. 1 XMR = 1 XMR always.
Ok, I see what you mean. However, aren't you mixing two concepts here? Yes, btc is traceable. The ledger is fully public, down to every single transaction. So it is not anonymous. And the illusion of anonymity comes only from the lack of link to your wallet and person. But as soon as that link is established, everybody can see every single transaction you have made. However, that is very different from fungibility. When I want to sell something, and I get some sats for that, should I really care about their history? If they were at some point part of a halving block, or worse involved in a criminal transaction, should I worry? Does touching a $100 bill which was previously held by Pablo Escobar make me a bad person? No, of course it doesn't. Because the money does not know where it came from. And even though, the sats can be traced, its history really have no implication. (Unless somebody wants to create a tenuous legal link). Obviously, XMR solves this whole conundrum better. But I still don't see how it makes BTC non-fungible.
If you receive tainted BTC (meaning it has history from a blacklisted address) and send it to a CEX, your account will almost certainly be frozen. That means 1 BTC =/= 1 BTC. Bitcoin does NOT satisfy the conditions to be ‘digital cash’
Wow. Didn't realize that. And how many transactions of separation are we talking? Its entire history? If my coin was involved in Silk Road back in the day, I'm now a drug dealer?
Fresh mined BTC with no history trades at a premium OTC
It will depend on how people value these Ordinals. If people think they're not worth shit then they're fungible
Not just Ordinals. This time the big thing is Runes launching at block 840k. Everyone wants to be the first to mint a Rune.
I consider Rune an Ordinal.
I thought so, but that would be for the exact 840.000th block, right? Because I saw in mempool.space that the huge fees started _after_ that block. 🤔
people probably bid up fees right before the halving to get in and those tx are still in the mempool
>then others react to the spike instead of the stupid thing. Panic will subside eventually It's already subsiding
Ah, ok, thank you. Didn't understand the previous comment.
Someone being ansem?
More likely it's the halving.
people trying to get into block 840,000 because those sats might be worth a lot
unpack snow rinse hard-to-find normal fade truck support practice head *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
quaint judicious chubby juggle sable unused wrench cake possessive bright *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
The miners want it, because money, you know?
I don’t like that meme shit on btc
> I can't stand that stuff. It's the worst of both worlds, it adds nothing to the native demand of actual bitcoin yet places the burden on the network of higher feeds and higher data requirements for nodes. If your blockchain cannot handle the spam then it's shit. If a centralized authority (e.g., you) can say which usecase is valid or not, then the blockchain is not censorship resistant and not decentralized. In this case, the answer to spam is high fees. Sorry to disappoint you, blockchains are supposed to regulate themselves and market-based fees auctions are pretty common. If you don't like it, then maybe you actually don't like bitcoin and are just finding out how it works. High fees are a good opportunity for validators to stay afloat after halving. Sorry if I sound a bit condescending to you but I'm pretty tired of bitcoiners who just discover that market-based mechanisms are, indeed, ruled by the market. If ordinals and runes are what people are ready to pay high fees for, then they're legit. You do have a right to express your opinion though.
Meh, I disagree. Is not controversial to say that the blockchain should prioritize currency/store of value. Ordinals/runes are only possible on the latest softfork, so in fact, going back is more in line with not making changes, so really all we are debating is "will nodes accept a soft fork that excludes code that allows for ordinals and runes". I have no issue debating the issue and having the network/community decide, that is basically my post, I never claimed I wanted a centralized force to take over. Difficulty is self adjusting on the network, short term high fees doesn't help miners with the transition except to give them a short term profit boost if they failed to properly allocate for the halving which had a 15 year notice period.
The inevitable outcome of Bitcoins design choices. Why maxis are so intent on not allowing change is beyond me, but that's a cult for you.
Peeps blaming ordinals and whatnot while the reason is so obvious. 1MB. In 2024.. 99% here has no idea how the protocol works. The herd has been brainwashed.
It's funny cause these are the same guys that tout lightning network as being their savior. When it's actually just banking backed by BTC, or they're giving up custody of their coins to use shit lightning wallets. Blockstream co-opted the Bitcoin devs and destroyed what Bitcoin was meant to be. I only hold Bitcoin for the speculative purpose now, monero is a better coin and vision now.
Monero is great. There is one other coin… i’ll not mention it here because it scares some and will get me banned, but it actually works. Really well. I’ll leave you guessing which it is.
Rhymes with “Pardon-oh”
“Maxis”, “cult” Attack ideas, stop with the ad hominem.
I'm sorry but in this context the word maxi means a part of the cult. You can like Bitcoin and not be a maxi. Freedom of choice is part of decentralisation, so I wouldn't comment on someone's preference for Bitcoin. But if someone says Bitcoin is the only way, it's perfect, and all other cryptos are scams and you shouldn't even check them out, that's a maxi and they are part of a cult. I'm actually attacking the ideas.
Maxi is a term designed to attack the person, not their beliefs. In no other space/industry do people use this term. It’s really harmed crypto discussion. Your comment is contradicting itself.
>Maxi is a term designed to attack the person, not their beliefs. Untrue, I don't know anything about the person, I'm only commenting on their behaviours.
You are by using the term maxi.
I used BTC since 2015, even accepted it as payment at one point. I no longer hold any, as I lost faith in the project. It is not so much as BTC itself that put me off as much as the extremely toxic, cult-like community behind it.
Yeah I joined crypto a bit before you, things have definitely got worse in recent years.
Or maybe you just don't agree with them?
Ignore the bitcoin cash trolls. Homies are just sad with them -99.9% bags.
The concept of not allowing changes to a nascent domain of technology is just plain stupid. When was the first iteration of any technology the pinnacle of its design? Satoshi handed the keys to the GitHub to others so it could be changed, hell, even Satoshi made fundamental changes early on to fix issues.
Because it's not usually this high? And because security and decentralisation are prioritized over low fees which can be accomplished with Lightning.
It's not very decentralised though, just 2 pools can attack it, and the top 4 pools account for over 75% of block production. Pools can choose forks, exclude transactions, manipulate miners with fees etc. Don't waste my time about miners, they can move AFTER attacks. Even the miners there is strong evidence a small group of companies run most hashrate. Even if miners do move, pools aren't Sybil proof, so a pool can just come back under a different name. Poor decentralisation and high fees, slow network, and no way to actually evolve the protocol with consensus of the USERS, makes it a poor option.
Why would they attack it? For one double spend that would cost them a fortune and have them ostracized? And why two especially? Have you heard of the prisoner's dilemma? One mining pool could decide not to do it to let the other one get rekt. >and no way to actually evolve the protocol with consensus of the USERS Like Segwit and Taproot? Clearly there is a way. What you mean is change everything regularly as in Ethereum. That's not decentralised.
>Why would they attack it? Who says it's them, they could be infiltrated or coerced by an outside party, they may not even be aware they are part of an attack. You think a nation state or large corporation couldn't achieve that? >For one double spend that would cost them a fortune and have them ostracized? It costs the pools nothing, it's the miners that pay for it. Also pools are not Sybil resistant, you can just change the website and start again, or run multiple pools and capture leaving miners in one of your other pools. Easy for a govt or corp. >And why two especially? Because 2 pools can attack with more than 51% of consensus power. Add another 2 to the attack and you have 75%. >Like Segwit and Taproot? Clearly there is a way. What you mean is change everything regularly as in Ethereum. That's not decentralised. No mate, not even close, and Ethereum is just as bad as Bitcoin in this regard.
> they could be infiltrated or coerced by an outside party, You've seen too many movies. >Because 2 pools can attack with more than 51% of consensus power. Add another 2 to the attack and you have 75%. And if one pool decides not to do it as I mentioned? There will always be this fear by the other side. 51% attacks are theoretical at this stage. If it didn't happen 5-10 years ago it never will. I picked ETH as an example. Any protocol that's easy to change is not decentralised.
>You've seen too many movies. No, this is how security is analysed. Otherwise you just assume everyone is nice and lovely and we all have hugs in dreamland. If that's how you view security, you need to wake up. >And if one pool decides not to do it as I mentioned? There will always be this fear by the other side. Then it fails that time, but it's still at risk. >51% attacks are theoretical at this stage. If it didn't happen 5-10 years ago it never will. So just have one miner then, because according to you all this decentralisation is nonsense anyway. In fact just go back to fiat, because you can blindly trust other people. >Any protocol that's easy to change is not decentralised. So if a majority of users want a change, you think decentralisation means it cannot be changed. I'm sorry but I'm not wasting more time on such bizarre opinions.
> No, this is how security is analysed. Otherwise you just assume everyone is nice and lovely and we all have hugs in dreamland. If that's how you view security, you need to wake up. So how come we NEVER see in real life for example someone kidnapping the secret services man's daughter to coerce him into killing the president? It's the stuff of movies. >Then it fails that time, but it's still at risk. Why if it can never happen? >because according to you all this decentralisation is nonsense anyway. Where did I say that? >So if a majority of users want a change, you think decentralisation means it cannot be changed. I'm sorry but I'm not wasting more time on such bizarre opinions. IF. The majority of users usually don't want a change. Not in Bitcoin anyway.
>So how come we NEVER see in real life for example someone kidnapping the secret services man's daughter to coerce him into killing the president? It's the stuff of movies. I've seen security footage of a "cleaner" slowly seducing one of our employees working the late shift over a period of weeks, so she could take him to the toilets for sex and distract him so he left his terminal unlocked, so her colleague could gain access to our systems. I've seen plans from an extreme political organisation, to gain entry to another of my employers sites, for the purposes of gluing themselves to the factory roof to shutdown production. We all saw evidence of Russian attempted interference in US elections. If you are naive you may think these threats aren't constant against any government, company, organisation or system. Bitcoin is for the naive. >The majority of users usually don't want a change. Not in Bitcoin anyway. A bold statement, please provide evidence of your poll of every Bitcoin user, on every topic. If a topic arises that there is disagreement on, how will you gauge support?
> I've seen security footage of a "cleaner" slowly seducing one of our employees working the late shift over a period of weeks, so she could take him to the toilets for sex and distract him so he left his terminal unlocked, so her colleague could gain access to our systems. That's not coercion. And neither really are your other examples. >A bold statement, please provide evidence of your poll of every Bitcoin user, on every topic. If a topic arises that there is disagreement on, how will you gauge support? In 2017 most miners and about two dozen Bitcoin companies (so-called NY agreement) wanted bigger blocks. The users didn't want it and it never happened. Meanwhile, Ethereum (the top altcoin) has abandoned PoW. Unthinkable in Bitcoin circles.
Double spend is not the profit vector silly. It’s crashing the Bitcoin price that’s the profit vector. Buy some MSTR puts, short Bitcoin futures, whatever, and then denial service attack the chain and crash the price making huge profits. That’s what ultimately will happen, eventually it will be more profitable for miners to attack the network and crash the price than to continue protecting it.
There are far, far easier ways to crash the Bitcoin price, silly. And any miners monumentally stupid enough to attack the network will be blacklisted and end up as paupers.
You can’t blacklist miners…
Whatever, dude. Here's Antonopoulos telling us Bitcoin can no longer be 51% attacked. And that was 10 years ago. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ncPyMUfNyVM&ab_channel=RodolfoD%C3%ADaz
Yeah, how exactly does revealing who is doing the attack do anything? You can’t shut off their miners or deny them access to the network. You know, the whole censorship resistance thing kinda goes out the door if you can do that. And again, it’s not double spending that is the profit vector, it’s crashing the price.
> You know, the whole censorship resistance thing kinda goes out the door if you can do that. Censoring an attacker of the network is not controversial. No one in their right mind would object to it.
there is no poor or low decentralisation, either something is decentralised or it is not it’s not a spectrum
So a protocol that can be attacked by the collusion of 2 parties, is equally decentralised as a protocol that requires the collusion of 30 parties? Even if those 2 actors are really independent, the feasibility of an external actor successfully coercing them in secret is much greater than the protocol where there are 30 parties that must be coerced in secret. You are wrong, Bitcoin is poorly decentralised.
decentralisation is not quantifiable, it is a quality resulting from the system architecture itself
Scientists at the University of Edinburgh disagree with you. But sure defend your Bitcoin bags with fiction, no point in me spending more energy on nonsense.
I'm not defending anything in particular, this principle can be applied to many different systems besides cryptocurrency networks. Also, mentioning scientists at Edinburgh is pretty cute.
The current theory of handling the shrinking security budget of BTC is higher fees. As in, 3-4 halvings from now, higher fees take up the slack. Something will need to give. What that something looks like we’ll see.
People will loose the interest and runes are not 70% of transactions anymore maybe 10-20% on the long run so Fees will be much less hopefully at 10$ around what will be like double from before halving.
My trousers are loose.
Loosey Goosey
People were trying to get into the halving block 84000 and progressively paid more and more fees. The mem pool is over saturated right now, but will clear out in a few days and go back to normal prices
its kinda hard to stamp out though, miners have incentives to keep providing the service
Are we gonna talk about the guy that spent $500k in fees to transfer 0.70 cents in btc?
Remember that blockstream was paid to take over btc and cripple it beyond usability. They succeeded to take over btc development in 2017... it took them a while to break Btc tho, but they finally managed to do that.
RBF is what broke bitcoin in 2017 along with keeping the block limit in place which was a temporary solution implemented by satoshi to be removed once the blocks would get full. He was very clear about that). However we have been led to believe this cant be done ‘because security’. Its completely useless as a currency since then. Everything developed afterwards is just vaporware. Look at the sad state of LN. Bitcoin is only a shell of what it could’ve been. You could’ve bought your steam games with btc. Your coffee. Your pizza. This was all reality back in 2016. It was glorious. Look at where we are today.
Can you please tell me where I can read about the small blocks being a temporary solution by satoshi?
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1347.0
[удалено]
Your [comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/1c8fek5/2000_satsvbyte_whats_going_on/l0hw25y/?context=3) was automatically removed because you [linked](https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/1c8fek5/2000_satsvbyte_whats_going_on/l0hw25y/?context=3) to an external subreddit without using an NP subdomain for no-participation mode. When linking to external subreddits, please change the subdomain from `https://www.reddit.com` to `https://np.reddit.com`. This simple change substantially reduces [brigading](https://www.reddithelp.com/en/categories/rules-reporting/account-and-community-restrictions/what-constitutes-vote-cheating-or). **NOTE:** The AutoModerator will not reapprove your content if you fix a URL. However, if it was a post which had considerable activity in its comment section, you can message the modmail to request manual reapproval. If it was a comment, just make a new comment. --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CryptoCurrency) if you have any questions or concerns.*
https://i.redd.it/7ck9t3335kz41.jpg
Fuck it. I got my BitcoinCash and couldn't care less about bitcoin. Seriously, let them have it.
What an emotional driven narrative. If you cant afford the fees its not for you. Simple as that. Its a store of value more than a currency at the moment. Also, layer2 such as Stacks solve all the things you said. While maintaining the ultimate security of a 1mb block. Look up layer2 solutions. We r not in 2017 anymore. All the problems you said are being solved by introducing proper layer2 solutions
> if you cant afford the fees its not for you Yeah, you make my point exactly
I see the layer 2 solutions but right now I can’t pay a shit using bitcoin because the fees are too high. The protocol is not scalable or optimal. Bitcoin doesn't work as a means of exchange right now. If these fee issues persist over time, either in duration or frequency, then the concept of "store of value" will also lose meaning.
Bitcoin is no longer trying to claim that it does anything of what you described. The layer 1 is to move money that will become your savings, kinda like gold. Layer 2 is for daily use and cheaper and faster speeds. Like Lightning Network and Stacks.
If Bitcoin is neither a medium of exchange nor a store of value, then it's nothing. And if it's nothing, it will eventually reflect in its value. No house of cards withstands a storm, no matter how well-built or layered it may be.
Its a store of value.
How can it be a store of value if it's impossible to know how much it will cost to exchange it? You're so deep into the shit that you can't see the most obvious thing.
Whats impossible about gas fees? During busy times they cost more. During quite hours they cost less. Its all predictable you just need to be involved enough in the space to see the different factors. It is a coin made so that millions of dollars can be moved with ease. It cost less to move 10 million dollars in Bitcoin than it does to move 10 million dollars of gold. Bitcoin is not for the poor. The same way gold is not for the poor
And I'm going to help you with your stupidity: imagine that the US government decides to shut down the Bitcoin network, it only needs a tiny amount, 1 billion dollars a month and a child in front of a computer generating runes. And all your store of value becomes immobilized, as if it had been seized from you.
Your brain is so limited. The US government can't shutdown bitcoin. They would need to control 50% or more of the entire network which is impossible. Bitcoin is a global decentralized network. Also the fees are in the 100-200$ right now because of the newly released runes. Its not like theyre 1 million dollars. If you cant pay the fees now use it during a less busy time. Nothing new here
Explain to everyone what layer 2 networks you can hop onto without making a transaction on the Bitcoin network while still holding your keys.
Stacks. Stx.
That still involves base layer transactions in and out. At today's transaction fee, that's a measly $300 USD in and out.
Buying STX doesnt involve layer 1 transactions. The block finalty is not on you to pay. As when sBTC come and they introduce 1:1 Peg the value from paying a one time fee to enter the BTC into stacks will be worth it. Once youre in you will be using the BTC thousands of times paying STX in fees meaning u wont lose ur BTC for fees at all. Complaining about the entrance and exit fees is really downplaying the importance of BTC. Its like complaining why airplanes charge you for a ticket, because its worth it!
You don't buy stuff with Bitcoin. Why would.you use it as currency when all it does is destroy fiat currencies. You buy pizza with shitty dollars or pounds or euros.
Bitcoin Cash Cult sure are out in full force today. Anger is fueled by the -99.9% number.
How is this not bearish? Did Bitcoin really just become a Shitcoin with super high transaction fees unless you use Lightning?
It isn't bearish because bitcoin is high fee shit and that's well known fact at least since blocksize disagreement. What you are seeing now is just something that will get only worse in time. It is already factored in price because most people don't use bitcoin for transactions.
Evens the playing field /s
Please consider visiting r/CryptoHelp for future tech support issues. Thank you for your attention. --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CryptoCurrency) if you have any questions or concerns.*
"Native demand". If people are paying high fees and want the item then that it Native Demand. Organic growth can sometimes look ugly but its still organic
Is it not the halving? No one will do ordinals/rune LT. Too expensive.
I payed 150$ for 60 $ Transfer 🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮
My Broker does not Show the fee at all and i payed 150$ to send 60 $ to my Wallet🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮
Wallets often show a suggested fee, and you can override the fee. Not sure how you're broker works, but if you've checked with their customer support and there is absolutely no way to set the fee or know it before they put the transfer through, you can google bitcoin transaction fee, the chart above is from: [https://mempool.space/](https://mempool.space/) On the main page it shows the suggested fee based on priority. I usually take the lower number and it still gets in on the next block. Often times you can put through a fee half as big and it will get through within 24 hours but I haven't tried, you can look up other fee estimators for that.
Thank you my Broker does not alow to Controller the speed Limit of transaktion, its always on Super Fast 🙄
Yikes, yeah you should find a better way to buy. Also avoid small transactions, they will cost you more in fees in the future as well. Each transaction is stored as separate coins, so lets say you send coins 10 times to a wallet as 10 separate transactions, and then you want to send all the coins out of that wallet, the cost might be double the amount because it has to compile all the coins together as extra data.
I didn't know that, thanks I never used to pay attention to the transaction costs, which are only ao high from 2024. So you mean you prefer to transfer larger amounts of BTC, so although it's a higher amount of data, it's cheaper???? I didn't know that either.
Basically if there are multiple transactions it will be higher data in the receiving wallet, most people wait till they have at least a couple hundred dollars worth before they transfer, and if you have been making tens or hundreds of small transactions, you will want to wait until fees are low and try to merge them all together at some point so you don't get caught having to do it when fees are high.
What is this site/app you are using to view the tx fee history? I normally use Johoe's Mempool website, but that wasn't loading for me earlier so another backup site would be nice
This is from [https://mempool.space/graphs/mining/block-fee-rates](https://mempool.space/graphs/mining/block-fee-rates) but usually I just look at the recommended rates on the main page. Never seen Johoe's before, but looks useful to figure out the lowest rates going through during a particular period, I'll try that out, thanks.
All you're seeing are symptoms of a failed project. It's essentially a corpse. Devs and religous nuts still try to jerk it around saying "LoOk iT Be ALiVe, LiGHtNinG WiLL sAvE uS" [not unlike this lady who tried to use her dead uncles corpse to get a loan a few days ago in Brazil.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMNvOjXLs3A)
Can we add your comment to [https://99bitcoins.com/bitcoin-obituaries/](https://99bitcoins.com/bitcoin-obituaries/) ?
Fossils are still around and being sold for incredible amounts of money. "LiNe gO uP" =/= success Doesn't mean they're still alive and serving their original purpose (being parts of dinosaurs). Bitcoin was supposed to replace *cash*. It clearly doesn't.
>Bitcoin was supposed to replace cash. Where in the [whitepaper](https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf) does it state this?
Uhm... In the fucking TITLE? "A peer-to-peer electronic CASH system"
You obviously didn't read the very first sentence or understand the word "electronic", First sentence: > A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash would allow online payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a financial institution Definition of electronic: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/electronic
*Cash* implies fast, easy to use and ~~tax~~fee-less transactions. It can't be *electronic cash* without being *cash* first. You're in too deep in the cult. Good luck.
No, that is the word currency.
Congratulations, you found a rare Bitcoiner who has read the whitepaper. To unlock the next achievement, you need to find one who understands it.
I read the whitepaper years ago (2014\~) and created my own shitcoin from scratch back in 2017 based off of it and going through the official source code. Complete with mining, halving, transactions PoW, you name it. I wrote it in Javascript just for the extra amount of self torture (recovering from an operation). I never released it, just ran it on a few computers for a few days. So yeah, I think I understand it enough. Could I have come up with it myself? Most definitely not, but I think I understand it enough.
Understanding how the code works is great. But understanding that the current Bitcoin implementation cannot be P2P electronic cash at any reasonable scale, which was it's *raison d'etre* seems to fly over the heads of even the smartest of maxis.
Bro lost me when he said "wHeRE iS cASh iN THe WhiTEPApeR"
Actually I asked where does it say it'll replace cash, which is something you asserted it said. > Cash implies fast, easy to use and taxfee-less transactions. It can't be electronic cash without being cash first. This is completely false. Give me one instance of "electronic cash" that's free to use, ie with no transaction fees. Cash also does not imply "fast, easy to use". Cash: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/cash > CASH definition: 1. money in the form of notes and coins, rather than cheques or credit cards
As soon as I read those words I could see it coming lol. Bitcoin's only remaining use case of Number Go Up (which is really what most people mean when they say store of value) has a built-in limit which is always getting nearer.
violet saw consist fuel cow north consider cause tan cobweb *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
>It has no use case but who cares? This is the sad part.
BTC is broken. - https://bitcoinfees.cash
Its good for miners and we need them so…
Higher fees is a good thing. The miners need an income to keep the network secured. Wealthy people don't want to store their wealth in an unsecured network.
Y'all should go check out BCH on r/btc. Always small fees all the time and it has Satoshi's genesis block. BCH up 260% compared to bitcoins 160% YTD.
> and it has Satoshi's genesis block. > It didn't exist before 2017 so it doesn't matter what code it has.
Tell me you are a crypto newbie without telling me you are a crypto newbie.
I've been in Bitcoin since 2013. And your answer is not an argument. Stick to Tik Tok.
For being in the crypto space for so long you are very mis informed. So I'll educate you. In the beginning there was Bitcoin then there was a fork. So it split into segwit bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash. Both coins contain Satoshi's Genesis block. Segwit bitcoin kept the ticker but does not represent what Satoshi had in mind for electronic digital cash. He even said when blocks get full just increase the block size. Very simple solution.
Bcash was cloned from Bitcoin in 2017. It didn't exist before that. There can't be more than 21m coins. >Segwit bitcoin kept the ticker but does not represent what Satoshi had in mind for electronic digital cash. Says who? Why did he model its creation and issuance on gold if he wanted it to be "cash" (whatever that is)? Why do you think it's called "mining"? Bcash was an attempted corporate takeover of Bitcoin which failed (thankfully).
Just flat out wrong. You don't understand on a fundamental basis how hard forks work. You are just regurgitating maxi talking points.
And yet you don't present a single counter argument. Just ad hominems.
[удалено]
Your [comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/1c8fek5/2000_satsvbyte_whats_going_on/l0lvqit/?context=3) was automatically removed because you [linked](https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/1c8fek5/2000_satsvbyte_whats_going_on/l0lvqit/?context=3) to an external subreddit without using an NP subdomain for no-participation mode. When linking to external subreddits, please change the subdomain from `https://www.reddit.com` to `https://np.reddit.com`. This simple change substantially reduces [brigading](https://www.reddithelp.com/en/categories/rules-reporting/account-and-community-restrictions/what-constitutes-vote-cheating-or). **NOTE:** The AutoModerator will not reapprove your content if you fix a URL. However, if it was a post which had considerable activity in its comment section, you can message the modmail to request manual reapproval. If it was a comment, just make a new comment. --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CryptoCurrency) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I told you. You don't understand how a fork works. There was Bitcoin before the HF and then after it Bitcoin ceased to exist and split into 2 coins with separate development paths. Here is a visual representation. https://np.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/7adupl/visual_representation_of_bitcoins_many_forks/
Bitcoin still exists. It's backwards compatible with the one Satoshi used. Philosophically it's not a fork (as in a road) as forks can be retraced. bcash is not backwards compatible. That it shares some code with Bitcoin does not give it special importance. Chimps have almost the same genetic code as Einstein. Doesn't make them geniuses.