Jump to content
blackro9

About the fees

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, Argo said:

they should have change blockchain long time ago ... laziness ? 

I don't think laziness is the problem. The fee madness is eating everyone's lunch right now and i'm sure they recognize this issue. The problem has probably more to do with Counterparty i guess. If Counterparty would be implemented into Bitcoin Cash, it's coming, I would have no doubt that they would consider changing blockchain and we would see a thriving card economy as a result.     

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, wachtwoord said:

But Bitcoin cash doesn't have any sort of future ...

Is that an argument? :D 

If valuable but crippled projects like SOG move over to benefit from Bitcoin Cashs fungibility then both project will have a great future. And we are just making you a favor, I mean why waste Bitcoin Cors holy 1,05 mb floppy disk space on "prove to be uneconomic and less important use cases - wachtwoord"? Bitcoin Core is now "digital gold" or whatever... for everything else there is Bitcoin Cash, may the best Bitcoin win! 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean maybe it's a better idea to move to Litecoin or even Ethereum other than one that has chosen direct confrontation with the leader of the pack (and likely winner).

Anyway that's up to Counterparty to decide. I agree that Counterparty using the Bitcoin blockchain with a transaction per counterparty transaction isn't going to work. Perhaps lightning or a variation on it is an option? (They can even do a pilot on Litecoin).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Litecoin is "digital silver" and ruled by another small blocker (Samson Mow) and has a relatively small user base, why risk that road again? Ethereum i don't know, worse scaling properties and fees right now?

Lightning... who knows? It's a cool tech but I don't even know if locking up funds in channels are going to be a thing? It need to be tested in the wild first. It probably has it's use cases and will be implemented in Bitcoin Cash as well.

Quote

I agree that Counterparty using the Bitcoin blockchain with a transaction per counterparty transaction isn't going to work. 

Agree, i hope EDS make a change in the coming future. 

Edited by bjoorn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was looking to sell some of my collection and saw the fee prices. It would cost me hundreds of dollars to transfer not that many cards. It's crazy. On a side note is anyone buying collections?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the game could switch to PIVX, which has super low fees and is very fast, I think it could solve the ridiculously high fee problem. The current state of things has definitely deterred many from buying and selling new cards. Right now, just to put a bid in on a card on BoO costs over $12 US in Bitcoin. Same cost just to list something for sale. That will totally kill any potential this project has. I could see maybe a one cent fee, but that's about it. What is the developers' plan to resolve this?

Edited by joeychips

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello

What are the possible changes?

1) Counterparty no more on BitCoin

  •  a. by Counterparty itself : some initiative discussed, but not really started, a clear consensus is not reached
  •  b. other people do forks: initiatives started on Mona, Litecoin, Bitcoin Cash - we follow it
  •  c. we EDS do our own Counterparty fork on another blockchain : better to group other service/company/organisation together for 1) b.


2) out of Counterparty on another blockchain

  •  a. Which one is the good one? Half a year ago we started already this discussion, a lot were asking for Ethereum ERC-20 (we started analysis), today it would be more questionable, & and in 6 months?
  •  b. it requires several steps before implementation, analysis started, big project with long migration period (estimated 6 months to on-board all SoG cards & BCY holders, proof of wallet ownership), points to consider: blockchain (reliability, transaction tine & cost, API, etc.), SoG cards, other game’s & collection’s tokens playable in SoG, BCY, wallets (mobile & web, cold, burn), trading exchange, etc.

Today we are with 1) a. but no quick improvement solution seems to emerge soon
I consider that we have not enough visibility to engage in selection & implementation of 2), but we further follow it.
Short-term, the recommended path to engage in is 1) b. We estimate to have more info & feedback for end of January 2018.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Nicolas Sierro

1)a sure seems like the best option so far. Both Counterparty- and the Spells of Genesis project seems to suffer tremendously under the current situation. Please try to reach out to the Counterparty team and talk to them. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to formally and strongly urge the developers of Spells of Genesis to completely unhinge card purchases from the Bitcoin network because the fees remain way too high. For many weeks now, just to buy any one card (regardless of Bitcrystal price, the transaction fee is $15 to $20 dollars; that's ridiculous! This has been and will continue to hinder user adoption and market growth. In fact, I personally would have bought way more cards if the transaction fees were reasonable. Yet that has not been the case for a long time now. And no end is in sight as to when the Bitcoin developers will switch to low fees to use their network. Moreover, there is no clarity that the Bitcoin developers even want to switch to lower fees like the old days. In light of these sad truths, I would highly and eagerly recommend switching to a very low fee cryptocurrency with a fast network such as PIVX or Bitcoin Cash. How long would it take to make such a switch? Please consider this and let the community know what it would take to switch away from Bitcoin and onto a more efficient and economical blockchain.

Thanks for considering this important step for such an otherwise great game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+1 for BCH.

I talked to Adam B Levine and Devon (only payed counterparty dev) about this a few times already. I may post a summary of the call here but bottom line is they don't like BCH mainly for political reasons and are considering moving to LTC....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HI Ben. This is the main problem. I can't move any cards. I also cant move any BTC to XCP wallet. So it can cost $50 to move $100 to XCP wallet then another $20 to move card! Then there is no telling how long this transaction would take if ever. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, BenRPG said:

+1 for BCH.

I talked to Adam B Levine and Devon (only payed counterparty dev) about this a few times already. I may post a summary of the call here but bottom line is they don't like BCH mainly for political reasons and are considering moving to LTC....

LTC could be a very good idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why don't you update us on transaction fees. It must be affecting you too. If we can't move cards at a reasonable price like in cents then it will be hard to Gros this game community.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Transaction fees will naturally go up as the coin increase in value. Bitcoin Cash will be going to 32MB and even to unlimited. They even promise a portion of free transactions. So if we believe them then this will be the cheapest transaction route. Even LTC is more expensive now. With coloured coins coming back to BCH maybe XCP should too. This is not politics. We have gone beyond that. Those fools at Core have killed BTC. It is now down to the technology and philosophy. Can't have a store of value if your coin does not have a stable value. You can now sense that those Youtubers who argue Core are starting to doubt their own reasoning. Koolaid does wear off.

Edited by phanpp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi @phanpp

I merge your topics here, please do not hesitate to continue the discussion into this topic.

Thanks for your understanding, the best for 2018!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SOG trades are totally messed,
every card has “no buyers” in BOO, sell orders are disappearing
counterparty DEX is a desert, no orders
the public merchant swapbots is selling very few cards

with a 40$ BTC transaction fee the game is dead

you should trash BTC and go to a blockchain where we can play (BCH or LTC or anything else !)

if you dont like to migrate blockchain, do something else to solve the problem to stay alive 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 16/12/2017 at 2:51 PM, wachtwoord said:

But Bitcoin cash doesn't have any sort of future ...

BCH is the future,

BTC may be worth 1 bazillion dollars but it is dead as cryptocurrency

think about that any other blockchain is better than BTC for us

Edited by Argo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, eds_Yzia said:

Hi @phanpp

I merge your topics here, please do not hesitate to continue the discussion into this topic.

Thanks for your understanding, the best for 2018!

That's good. I repeat. We have gone past politics. It is down to technology and reality now. We have BTC and BCH competing on the same mining algorithm. This is like 2 weights on a see saw. On the one side you have a 1000 pound gorilla and on the other you have a 100 pound human. The difference is that the human is attach to the board with a safety belt ( Emergency difficulty adjuster EDA). The gorilla is unattached. Now you have the see saw going up and down and all the time the human is gaining more weight ( adopters and users). So unless the gorilla also gets strap in (EDA) , it is inevitable that it will fall off under certain conditions ( price movement resulting in permanent loss of mining hashrate ).When and it is a when not if, then SOG which has it's card transactions expensive to use now will become totally unuseable.

SOG cannot live on the BTC chain. It must move. BCH is the natural choice because that was what it was prior to 1 August, and even now after 1 August with an increase blocksize. It may change with the change in address format after 14 January however.

Edited by phanpp
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, yes yes. Glad some more start to see it. I was was absolutely alone with this pre Aug 1st (except for @phanpp). I would prefer BCH a lot over LTC. Specially since they (Devon and Adam) mentioned to me that they could easily snapshot everything and have everyone in control of all their keys and such. This would be the huge advantage of using BCH. They tend to LTC as they kind of would like to stay in the core team politically. And they had some segwit plans (probably also not needed on BCH because we actually like TXes). They mentioned having better dev support on the core (and LTC) team. And unfortunately I could not show the otherwise, because Peter R was a no-show for this meeting although he RSVPed. Anyway here are my notes from this meeting:

Summary from Chat with Adam and Devon from Tokenly/Counterparty

1. Adam B. Levine is a nice guy, Devon rather quiet introvert dev it seems.
2. Adam cares to much about politics by constantly stating he has to stay neutral.
3. For these reasons, they may go for Litecoin when they port the system over.
4. On BCH they could technically take everything over and get all people to stay with their keys in charge of everything. They seem to still see the political disadvantage bigger then the advantage.
5. They had some plans with SegWit which are not possible on BCH (I doubt they need SegWit, they were just hoping on it to improve scaling.
6. They need money and basically stated they go another direction unless someone would help them with funds.
7. Adam thinks bitcoin cash is like Roger in largest part. He does not seem to like Roger.
8. They would be very interested in token systems in general also on BCH
9. Basically for political reasons they dislike coming on to BCH but would maybe consider if they got serious support.

I still see BCH as the perfect fit as you could easily port everything over. Clean cut for everyone, including polo and dex. But the problem is for political reasons this is not going to happen. Still to many who "hate" on the initial idea of bitcoin in practice.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First off: BTC is making tbe exact correct decisions to maximize its value. Payments systemis hardly relevant.

At the same time this means that a utility such as SOG assets is no longer cost effective with on chain transactions. Alternatives are either implementing the current system on top of lightning (feasible, but a bit complex and not adopted widely yet) or another block-chain, preferably one with niche functionality (if not niche at some point it will face similar scaling issues).

BCH has no value whatsoever for any type of application. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, wachtwoord said:

First off: BTC is making tbe exact correct decisions to maximize its value. Payments systemis hardly relevant.

At the same time this means that a utility such as SOG assets is no longer cost effective with on chain transactions. Alternatives are either implementing the current system on top of lightning (feasible, but a bit complex and not adopted widely yet) or another block-chain, preferably one with niche functionality (if not niche at some point it will face similar scaling issues).

BCH has no value whatsoever for any type of application. 

If you go LTC for cheaper transaction cost then when LTC gets tp 10,000 dollars it is no longer cheap transaction and you end up with the same problem. XCP requires that we use the transactions on-chain unless we recode to use lightning. If we can do this then maybe wait for lightning. If not KISS principle is always best, and in this case is use BCH. It is the system we always had and it worked. It will continue working with bigger blocks even as the value of BCH increases.

I think that eventually core will code in the EDA and make BTC a reserve currency. With that it can co-exist with BCH and entice miners with high value and high fees even if it's dominance goes below 10%. By then reserve banks and institutions will hold them as reserve currency. It will only take one country to start this ball rolling and for all we know some may have already taken up positions.

There is a concerted move away from the USD as it is losing its' value. Lost to most currencies by up to 7% last year. No one is willing to standby to see their reserve dwindling in value. Some will find their way into BTC as reserve.

Edited by phanpp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×