Bitcoin Miners Say Fee Drought Poses Existential Threat to Network
Original: Bitcoin miners say fee drought poses existential threat to network
Key topics
The bitcoin mining community is sounding the alarm over a "fee drought" that's threatening the network's very existence, as transaction fees dwindle and miners struggle to stay afloat. Commenters are divided, with some pointing out that the original bitcoin design anticipated a shift to transaction fees as the primary source of miner income, while others argue that the 1MB block size limit has stifled the network's potential. As one commenter quipped, "Bitcoin got eaten up by institutions," highlighting the tension between decentralization and institutional investment. The debate reveals a complex web of trade-offs between decentralization, scalability, and profitability in the bitcoin ecosystem.
Snapshot generated from the HN discussion
Discussion Activity
Active discussionFirst comment
1h
Peak period
13
0-6h
Avg / period
3.8
Based on 19 loaded comments
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Aug 28, 2025 at 6:26 PM EDT
4 months ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Aug 28, 2025 at 7:33 PM EDT
1h after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
13 comments in 0-6h
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Aug 31, 2025 at 1:48 PM EDT
4 months ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
It is exactly designed this way, power off some hardware for a while if it is no longer profitable
But they didn't anticipate that people are not using BTC to buy pizza and a million other things, the great bulk of BTC is being stashed in financial vehicles like ETFs, generating fewer and fewer transactions.
Seems like a doom cycle. Fewer transactions, less profit, fewer miners, slower transactions, less value.....
Mobile users could just shard, prune, or use SPV on a typical residential internet connection. Meanwhile merchants and exchanges can afford ~$200/yr in hard drives to store the whole chain (It is only about 10TB). When you consider that an efficient entry-level bitcoin miner is in the many thousands of dollars, the cost of a couple hard drives a year is not very significant in the grand scheme of the centralization of the network.
You sacrifice a lot with payment channels. You have to be online to accept payments, you need to pre-fund a channel (that you pay expensive fees on in the case of a small blockchain), you need to route through other nodes with enough liquidity, you need to occasionally go online to prevent the channel from being insecurely closed.
Even if it was the case that the economy should primarily rely on the lightning network, it would still be complemented by a large adjustable blocksize for reasons mentioned in this article and the lightning network whitepaper. The current status quo is unmistakably bad for the security of the network.
Of course that would significantly reduce decentralisation - instead of a standard 1TB disk to run a node, you'd need 100TB! of storage space, without even considering the download.
Then you've got the increased bandwidth necessary to run the network which at the moment can even run over ham radio if necessary.
And even with those massive compromises, it would still be slow to confirm and could in no way compete with Visa/Mastercard.
If you made money by buying bitcoin a long time ago, you didn't get something for nothing. And if you sell it now, you can profit before the game of musical chairs collapses. So there is a limited window of arbitrage.
A little bit of work multiplied by a lot of risk and time.
Also it didn’t require any real work, just blind faith or forgetting that you even had bitcoin to begin with for a while.