Bitcoin Forum

What exactly is going on here?: https://blockchain.info/unconfirmed-transactions Is it possible that It's some kind of attack from miners to make people think that we need Bitcoin unlimited? Hash rate is no longer being displayed on the first page for some reasons so I can't tell exactly.

We need bigger blocks... lets all just run le BU

by now I think everyone knows perfectly well that this is a clear spam attack against bitcoin network and there is no hiding the facts.
the question about who is responsible has been around for a long time and I am afraid we can only come up with speculations and I nave not yet seen any valid evidence on who is/are doing this and why are they doing it.

we know it started with the block size debate, so it can be related to that.
we also know that the fees are rising a lot because of this and fees go to the miners. in other words they are making profit from this spam attack and a big amount of profit not just a simple couple of percentages rise. the total fee they have been earning has gone up a lot.

p.s. here is the link to the hash rate but it is not showing anything about this: https://blockchain.info/pools
p.p.s. another problem is that you can't really call this a spam! these are transactions that bitcoin protocol allows making. and no rule is being broken while making them.

The map, showing all the flags, i wonder if they already have the tracking in place to identify where bitcoin transaction is made?

Yeah, it is definitely a spam attack i think.

Even Coinbase has a hell of a ton of transaction backlog to go through. And although usually their transactions can stay pending for minutes before it is actually broadcasted onto the bitcoin blockchain, I waited like 1 hour for my transaction to go through today.

Make sure you pay enough fees, otherwise you're screwed.

It's now more than 70,000 showing... but why do you all think this is spam? This seems for me "normal" especially in past few months. Is it possible to see that it is different type of transactions, that would make them spam?

common situation

I've seen 100k+ during the ETF speculation

This has the hallmarks of Jihan Wu written all over it.

you have little to no understanding of how bitcoin works and for the past month you have been constantly spamming useless topics and comments all over the forum about bitcoin
no matter what people are talking about, you just connect it to your chain of FUD trying so hard to create panic.
anyways thanks for making me laugh out loud, and also thanks for spreading the FUD for the past month about split so I can buy cheap coins.

I am not sure what exactly you have in mind and want to imply here, but there is no easy or even possible way of knowing the origin of transactions.
theoretically you need to be connected to literary all the nodes to know which one broadcasted the transaction for the first time and that is not possible.

Team WU&Ver is on again. Yesterday Ver declared war against core devs on his domain bitcoin.com and now another spam attack begins. Blocks were fine for a time and transactions were also fast.

These fucking parasites trying to take over bitcoin. Ain't somebody gonna do something about this?

it has happened before, just because too many transactions with much lower transaction fees may get stuck
check the graph for mempool count for last 60 days ( or 1 year )
https://blockchain.info/charts/mempool-count?timespan=60days

A usual thing.  
Why always bitcoin unlimited? Did segwit not also offering the blocksize increase? This just makes more people have realized about BU is the only one offering the blocksize increase.

IMO, this is just a reaction due to the volatility of bitcoin market.



SegWit will more preferable.  ::)

I also think the same, why do all of you think this is some kind of a spam attack?
Miners could have to get some profits out of it, but It doesnt make sense for me basically spam up the blockchain just to get bigger fees from transactions?


50,000+ unconfirmed transactions is something I have seen many times in this year, as someone said before it is a rather common situation.
Is this thread more about the question why we can see such a big traffic on blockchain, or who does the spam attacks on bitcoin network?

Because I don't know yet, even 100,000+ not confirmed transactions have already happened many times, so what is the drama all about?

Jihan Wu is running Bitmain (e.g antpool, and hashnest) in the same way that a communist government runs a nation. The only thing we can hope to do is band together and boycott the antpool, hashnet, his other products, and expose him for who he really is. Hopefully the miners will understand, in the long run, Bitcoin is better off without Jihan Wu and Bitmain.

I learned that lesson the hard way a while ago, luckily after about 30 hours the transaction went through.

These days you can't even just let your wallet decide the fees, even with dynamic ones, you always have to countercheck.

I am glad that at least I made you laugh, however, I research everything before I post, so to attack me in that way, saying I don't know anything, or have very little understanding is unfair. Just because you and others don't agree, does not mean it's not true.

FUD? Not exactly sure what that is, however, I am not trying to create a panic, And I am totally against a split.

Let's see what happens with the implementation of SegWit in Litecoin. I think it will be important for Bitcoin, since if it gives some kind of problem it will be alert and if everything is all right, SegWit will gain strength.

LAST 1000 BLOCKS:

Bitcoin Unlimited blocks: 369  ( 36.9% )             
Bitcoin Classic blocks: 4  ( 0.4% )             
SegWit blocks: 279  ( 27.9% )

Bitcoin holders want bigger blocks: https://vote.bitcoin.com/arguments/block-size-limit-should-be-increased-to-8-mb-as-soon-as-possible

Miners and holders both want bigger blocks, and the TXs are backlogged. Core can raise the block size or cease to be relevant. Take your pick, Maxwell.

Huh? People using the network is "spam" now?

This is why bitcoin won't ever handle as many transactions as VISA - how could it, when people have the attitude that just using the network constitutes "spamming"?

The intensive use of the network with pennyworth transactions can be described as "spam attack." At the other hand, the BTC networking was designed to handle everyday transactions (as paying for coffee)? IMO, when this point become clear (BTC will be a "VISA killer"), we will know the true "calling" of BTC. 

i thing we need many blocks.or try to run bitcoin unlimited

It is a rather common situation these days to have around 50k+ unconfirmed transactions.

When you are using a wallet, it is recommended to send about 0.0005 to 0.00065 btc to be sure that the transaction will be confirmed soon enough.

I made a bit of researchs, and a few cryptocurrencies like DGB and Litecoin for exemple, are testing the Segwit. If it become a success, it will be way more better than Bitcoin Unlimited, more transparent, and less decentralised.

If you haven't read Alex.BTC's post on why its so easy to spam the blockchain now,
here it is:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1842146.msg18377507#msg18377507

I using blockchain.info wallet for more than 2 years and from the recent days. After blockchain people had meeting with the US commercial department. minimum fees has been increased to 0.0005 btc and confirmations every takes more 2+ hours to get completed.
These kind of altcoin araising to overtake the bitcoin. This is international political plan which moving bitcoin a side and over take the blockchain technology alone.

CORE removed the priority fee - no free tx if matured (meaning the every block/hourly spammer vs mature holder pay the same)
CORE removed the reactive fee - meaning it doesnt drop as soon as there is no demand
CORE added average fee - meaning it stays up based on the last 25+ block average fee
CORE stopped doing the usual lower the dust limit amount by a decimal when the price rises 10x (was 5000sat at $6 should be 50sat dust max)
CORE added more rules to reject relaying tx's unless certain fee is included

core literally removed all the coding things and just screamed "just pay more"..

so dont blame the pools.

Not one person in this forum can deliver any reason why SegWit is necessary.

Why is it so important to these people to move the signature information in a block?

And skip the malleability argument because I've already seen plenty of easier ways to deal with that.

unconfirmation transactions occur again. Well, this may be due to increased transaction that occurs when the price of bitcoin. whereas the transaction fee is quite large, but still make it happen. Well, for the moment, I think I would not do the transaction.

There’s another thread here (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1869279.0) basically saying the same thing, but this thread was created just after it, so I’m sure OP didn’t see it.

Anyway like I was saying there, in order to reach mass adoption, we need to fix this. Whether it be Segwit or BU or something else, we just need to face it: Bitcoin can’t hand this and it needs fixing now.

Bitcoin Unlimited is not an option, it is just set up to delay SegWit and look for sympathy from the public, there is a reason why the miners don't trust them, if they do let them do the hard fork they've been clamoring for

LAST 1000 BLOCKS:

Bitcoin Unlimited blocks: 373  ( 37.3% )             
Bitcoin Classic blocks: 2  ( 0.2% )             
SegWit blocks: 275  ( 27.5% )

Wow...took like 5 seconds to fact check your bullshit.

There are multiple solutions are available for avoiding bigger block hard fork. I believe segwit is having an ultimate intention for not having the erver untested hard forks. So, we should not rush for hard fork for the sake of better future of bitcoins.

If miners want to make us realize the need of bigger block size by pulling down their mining power, I am afraid it may may backfire themselves by making people switch over to altcoins.

You can put a stop to this just support Sigwit. This spam is coming from the chines mining pools. Making blocks larger would just increase their profit margins. The larger blocks get the more advantage they gain.

Why do you support Segwit?  Your signature says you are for 1mb blocks.

If we are going to increase this , why not just increase it instead of implementing Segwit which is extremely complicated and has drawbacks?

Just because something is complicated does not mean its not the best solution. Many people think bitcoin is already to complicated. Just because you can't understand how it works does not mean it won't work.
All solutions have drawbacks no path is perfect but this is the best path forward. But mostly because the Mining network is being destroyed by Chines mining pools who are using detrimental techniques that cause bloat to the blockchain and backlogs in the memory pool that slow down transactions.

Sigwit will put an end to ASIC boost, a technique that uses fake transactions (I say fake because they don't propagate across the network like other transactions they are created at the time the blocks are created for the sole purpose of increasing efficiency.)

All true. (but irrelevant)
 

Sounds like BS.  What technqiues?  Why only Chinese pools?  If you're talking about ASICboost, well with or without it, blocks will still be solved every 10 minutes so it won't change blockchain bloat or mempool.



There's other ways to end asicboost.  if this is why you want segwit, its not a strong argument for it. 

You asked why I support X then said my replay was true yet irrelevant? I'm a little confused about this.

(sounds like BS) if you don't know how ASIC boost works how can you refute it?

I am no expert but It is known that Chines mining pools reorder/rearrange transactions and even create fake transactions so when they are hashed into the merkle root of blocks they create many possible versions of an acceptable block and then attempt to mine all of them simultaneously thus increasing the odds they will find an acceptable output that meets the difficulty level of one of them. I think I heard someone refer to it as increasing the key space.
This in and of itself is not wrong or improper I myself am impressed they kept this secret for as long as they did but its bad for the blockchain and the bitcoin network as a whole.

The part about "Many people think bitcoin is already to complicated." is true but irrelevant.
 


Yes its how they are arranging things and hashing them.  This may give a miner an energy advantage but I don't see how it can possibly effect blockchain bloat or the mempool, which is what you claimed.  

If you still like segwit mainly because that is the Core team's work and part of their roadmap, please have the integrity to admit that.

 
"Yes its how they are arranging things and hashing them.  This may give a miner an energy advantage but I don't see how it can possibly effect blockchain bloat or the mempool, which is what you claimed.  "

Why did you bring up energy advantage? Oh wait I know because people like the idea of miners saving power because we must save the earth. You seem to be missing my point. And trying to manipulate readers.

They are building blocks and filling them with fake transactions, thus the blocks are larger then they need to be thus the block chain is larger then it needs to be, thus less room for real transactions. Thus more transaction backlogs and a unfair advantage for Chines mining pools that will inevitably lead to monopoly control of the mining network and loss of confidence in the Bitcoin system. And if you make the blocks larger that just allows The chines mining pools to gain even more advantage because then they would have more room to create custom transactions that "incrase the key space" of a acceptable blocks at the cost of hard drive space on full nodes making it cost more for full node operators. Causing the number of full nodes to drop, thus weakening the network against a Ddos attack.


And yes I support the Core because it is the most peer reviewed software in the whole world with some of the smartest people on earth working to improve it.  While the XT, Bitcoin classic, and BU groups are just tools of the Chines mining pools. Puppets.  

So again if you make blocks larger without fixing transaction malleability you just make the problem of spam worse. 

However, maybe they are using a modified form of Core that is sending encrypted messages through the blockchain in ways that Core doesn't recognize, so we don't even know the messages are there.

8)

If this is something intentional, I do not know, it's a bad idea, it's not good for bitcoin adoption. In any case, it is a sign that sooner or later it is necessary to find a solution to the problem of scalability.

This is just 60k it will went thru eventually, I have seen more than 100k unconfirmed transaction and network still goes on, no delay on my transaction as long as I pay the right fee.  This maybe an attack but who knows, maybe Bitcoin is getting that much adoption that unconfirmed transaction pile up.  Larger Blocksize or Segwit, just get on the upgrade so we can have a better user experience.

This is why bitcoin won't ever handle as many transactions as VISA...Eth is way faster

This is not a big problem it is just false spam attack created  by the coders so that bitcoin network and miners get pressure to implement segwit or other solution. which is not needed

Yes, it is needed. obviously you know nothing about the blockchain.

This is definitely an attack on the bitcoin. This has happened in the past and have come at the same time as when the news of another hardfork is looming again. And this attack cannot be overlook. Who is behind this? Well your guess is as good as mine. hehehe  :). And I'm pretty sure that many has left scratching their heads just who is really behind these. One must question who will benefit in this sorts of attacks. So I guess, we will just have to let it pass and see what damaged has done in the bitcoin ecosystem.

In which version did the Core do all this? How did this happen and did anyone protest back then? How come it was stopped?

So much hashrate controlled by one little fella and a poll on a site controlled by one of his special friends. Sounds objective.

And I'm with the spam theory. To go from very little to creaking backlog in no time at all when there's absolutely no reason points to the simplest explanation.

Such as.

By the time of BU rise it's found that more than 90,000 transactions stuck on the network. Same as that now once again a big number has stuck on the network. This is  surely a spam attack, because everything is going good​and there's nothing as a issueto contribute and cause it.

IIRC the another contributing factor of leading to 60.000+ unconfirmed transactions is because the problem of the bitcoin mixing, you know bitcoin laundering requires a lot of addresses and transactions each other.

Yes, Valery Vavilov. Pretty ironic that the Latvian is more of a commie than the asian.

Segwit solves tx malleability.   Its hard enough to get merchants to accept bitcoin when it works.   If instead we start again with hundreds of altcoins, it is a harder sell.   Maybe there is a soft layer we could add, like a multichain wallet that shows value in fiat and spends using a non congested chain at random.

There is a very nice litecoin wallet for Android that is apparently peer to peer. 

sdp

Down to well under half of what it was this morning.    8)

I've been trying to accelerate my transactions with the Transaction Accelerator from the website called viabtc.com, they work pretty well. The transactions that I've made were confirmed within 24 hours and I can't really complain on the type of speed that it has because I have a feeling that if I didn't use that then my Bitcoins would be within limbo like everything other transaction on Bitcoins Blockchain.
I think that this website is the only one out there right now though.

Bitcoin purpose is not to beat VISA's transactions capacity - AFAIK Visa can process up to 8000 tx per second.
Tell me - which altcoin can do the same or better?

Bitcoin is a new way to free you from the VISA, Banks, middlemen and parasitocracy of the old system.
Do you really want to complain about that BTC is not better than centralized payment system?

I just ran a pair of transactions through ViaBTC's acceleration service, which I have used with success quite a few times.

Both attempts were good ("Acceleration succeeded").  Now we will see how long it takes for the confirmations to actually happen.  I put both in by 10:10 PM (US ET).  As of now, there are about 29,800 unconfirmeds, so we'll see.

And anyone who sold it to you on that basis needs slapping upside the head. It might be conceivable with huge advances but it certainly won't happen as is. And there already is a wonderful payment system that can do this. It's called Visa.

I'm not complaining either I'm glad that I'm free from middlemen who will restrict my account up to 180 days if they think I have unusual activity in my account but those transactions lag should be address to make everything fine and smoothly and bitcoin adoption continous

This numbers of unconfirmed transactions is being  common and frequently happening in this days in blockchain network.Due to smaller blocks i think thats why there are big numbers of transctions that are unconfirmed.This is happening almost everyweek now in the network.

Clearly it's a spam attack were multiple request is being sent to server and the server itself can't handle it.
This is why the reason we need to implement Segwit i guess the blocksize debate is related to this event maybe this is payback for the recent BU network attack and the miners arw gaining profit from it.

Dude, please read up on how bitcoin works before making yourself look this ignorant.

Then we must upgrade main bitcoin server.:D Blocksize is totally irrevelant because bigger blocks will be spammed with ease.
Only better server will help us. Will you please donate your bitcoins for a new server to this bitcoin address: 1ihav3n0id3ah0wb1tc0inw0rks ?

The main purpose of spamming the network is to make the fee rise even higher for those who want their transaction to be confirmed within a small amount of time. This discourage the use of Bitcoin. Your transaction will still be delayed if you send the transaction and a huge influx of transaction suddenly appear and your transaction would still be pushed to the bottom.

This shows the issue that Bitcoin has to address ASAP. Bitcoin has to be able to handle such loads, we can't just say "use an altcoin" for daily transactions.
Actually, all of the blocks are filled right now. The problem is with the transaction volume.

more likely it's people that don't pay the correct amount of fee or spam, i've always asked if there was a way to determine the spam and the real bitcoin usage, would be useful to knwo if we are still handling the real amount of transaction that are not pure spam

Maybe they were trying to determined what are the legit transaction are, there are some bugs now in transaction system taking up more minutes to be done,it may be due to a number of transaction one user is doing on that moment or because of the traffic on transaction that are too congested that is hard to process by the system. We just need to put our faith that soon those unconfirmed transactions will lead to a successful one.

Is there any evidence of spam transactions occurring? Recently, the system has been just about coping. Most blocks where full to the limit. So it only takes a small increase in transaction demand, and a backlog will start to occur which takes time for the system to clear up, as their is very little free blockspace with which to clear the backlog up with.
Perhaps we should 'blame the Chinese' who might have started withdrawing funds from recently freed up exchange accounts?

I thinks with $238,789,000 volume per day, this is Still normal
Thanks

yup because the price of bitcoin affecting the volume in US dollar. if the bitcoin transacting volume in Us dollar is the same but 1/5 of the current bitcoin price, then it will be another situation (your transaction is gonna last forever to confirm :P).

I am surprised to see that there are actually this much amount of unconfirmed transactions but if you are giving the right amount of transaction fees then it will get through as i just sent some coins recently and it almost took an hour to get three confirmation ,i have given a fees of 0.0009 btc and i am sure even if you give a higher fees it will take the same amount of time.

I don't believe it's any kind of attack. It didn't last a few hours if it even was.
Right now it's just 11k unconfirmed which is supposedly normal.

We need to realize that more and more numbers could exist. Don't we all hope that bitcoin becomes a worldwide currency?

Therefore, SegWit.

It happens a lot lately.
The network can only do 7tps at maximum.
Some times even that doesn't happen.

But things are back to normal right now 9000 unconfirmed, piece of cake :).
I remember the largest backlog was at around 200k right? During the so called "test" ?

Things are definitely better then It was yesterday, I have a question though, If this is indeed a spam attack, anybody could do it? or this require money and resources to do? curious how It's done but If it require money, I believe big whales are behind it.

Dear all
I thinks is nomal at price over $1120/BTC

anybody can do it. but yes some resources , you need a software to generate many transactions and money to pay for the fees, but actually not that much money because you can put tiny fee and send to yourself.

i am no expert but some things (i think) are obvious. for example the transactions need to be paying higher fees or they would be useless. so each paying 200-300 satoshi per byte. now multiply that by the number of transactions in the memory pool (60K-100K) or better multiply by how many of them are confirmed (which is more than that number) and you get the cost.

with that cost you can see who can or can not do it.

as other resources, this is obviously an automatic process. so some programming skills and a server is needed.

only useless to real user.   spammer doesnt need to pay anywhere near that cost.  they can put absolute minimum that would be relayed whatever that is (no fee?) im not sure

if there are 1 million transactions paying 10 satoshi per byte i pay 20 satoshi per byte and i will have priority over all of the 1 million spam transctions so miners will pick my tx.

they spam to take the space in the block (fill it up) not to take the space in the memory pool. and to take the block you need to have higher priority hence the higher fee.

Hahahaha oh ya but then we'll also have unlimited bitcoins and they're going to be worthless. That sounds great let's all jump on board.

You would think, but not so.

Bitfury still fill blocks with low fee spam from addy 3QQB6AWxaga6wTs6Xwq8FYppgrGinGu15f before higher fee paying real tx's.
See for example https://blockchain.info/block-index/1477998

Addy https://blockchain.info/address/3QQB6AWxaga6wTs6Xwq8FYppgrGinGu15f has sent 140238tx's, all spam, nearly all relayed by Bitfury.

you are partially right..but

a)  they can still bid very low and cause problems
b) it contributes to high fees for everyone else
c) the fuller the blocks are naturally, the less extra space there is , so cheaper to spam (this is why bigger blocks will help fight spam)

yes i have seen those before but for every one of these low fee spams there are so much more with higher fees.
and bitfury only finds 11% of the blocks nothing more. so that would be practically ineffective because other miners reject them.

i find this statement contradictory.
cheaper to spam means easier to make more transactions.

and how much bigger blocks are we talking about!
1.2 MB 1.5 or 2 or 10 MB or 20
are nodes and miners really ready for that size. i don't think so.

But for every one of these low fee tx's (sending nothing exept a fee) included in a Bitfury block, another higher paying fee is not included, meaning fees rise further. 140,000 tx's from 1 addy, sending nothing except low fee, have been included in Bitfury blocks, while "recommended fee" paying tx's (6x higher fee or more) are left in the mempool.

140,000 tx's at 386 bytes equals around 5.5 blocks created by 1 addy, mined by Bitfury, sending 0 btc.
Can't be helping anything.

since you brought this up i went through it and i encountered this:
https://blockchain.info/block-index/1486455 (mined by AntPool)
Ctrl+F the address it contains 252 of these transactions and it seems like bitfury is not the only miner picking these up after all!

p.s. the block was mined during the spam attack while mempool was full (2017-04-15 11:09:19)

You did not "go through it" very far though(?), or you would see that only a tiny fraction have been mined by other pools.
Some Bitfury blocks include around a thousand of these tx's.

p.s. the block i linked was also mined at the peak of mempool backlog.

Lets say that naturally blocks would be 800kb.  If you only have 200kb free per block, and a transaction is say, 200bytes,
thats 1000 transactions.  Let's say people don't really want to pay more than $1 (they can use paypal or another coin),
that is going to cost $1000.

But if you have lets say 8mb blocks, and 7mb are free , thats 35,000 transactions.  So even if transactions are only 5 cents,
it still costs more ($1750).  

Obviously that's just one possible comparison but the more full blocks get the cheaper it gets to spam, that is the principle here.



 

Yesterday I was transact some money and I have no problem :/ I have no idea there were so many unconfirmed transaction until now. And yes, of course we need bigger blocks because more and more people are using btc and that will be more and more difficult to make a transaction, I hope this problem will be solved soon, especial now, Easter.

3QQB6AWxaga6wTs6Xwq8FYppgrGinGu15f paying to 3QQB6AWxaga6wTs6Xwq8FYppgrGinGu15f - Bitfury did the spamming?

ETH probably spamming to promote their awesome blockchain  mean time in BTC idiots are fighting Segwit/notSegwit.
1MB block no limit. ***
When BTC spammed ETH blockchain they forked 2x in 3weeks... Problem solved.
And this is main difference between those coins BTC can be played like children in kindergarden.

I know it is not a proper solution ,if there is a split then unlimited bitcoins will be worthless and how about the price of bitcoin unlimited futures started by some exchanges basically Bitfinex and HitBTC, did they create some dumb contracts and how about people speculating about that.

That's interesting, can we confirm that by far Bitfury is the only pool picking these up?
As if Bitfury wants to collect their spam fee back.

Note that Bitfury and Blockstream share the same investors, some interesting links:
Investors in BitFury Group also invested in Blockstream (https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/bitfury/insights/investors/blockstream)
A Look at DCG & Bitfury's Incestuous Ties With the U.S. Government (https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/58ttsv/a_look_at_dcg_bitfurys_incestuous_ties_with_the/)

Time to kill this thread. Unconfirmed transactions down to 6700.

naturally a lot of unconfirmed transaction because every day bitcoin users then increases.

That's not what the problem is. The problem is that blocks aren't big enough and people are spamming them so that something will actually be done about it. There's an agenda behind their spamming and that's what this is a discussion about.

well that is the clear difference between a complete decentralized system without any centralized authority to decide whether actiate segwit/nosegwit or anything else.

and a centralized system called ethereum which is performing like a bank and the decisions are made by that centralzied authority without heeding what the rest of the users say.

Very interesting find considering BitFury is the biggest nuthugger of Core/Blockstream/SegWit. Could they be getting big money from the same banks that are funding blockstream to spam the network?

is that the reason bitcoin having so many unconfirmed transactions, to force people to use ETH? which means bitcoin unlimited and/or SegWit have nothing to do so? ??? wow ETH is a troll towards bitcoin for this.

Honestly, I am starting to hate this kind of situation. I am clearly seeing an abuse here but i cant do anything about it. Because of the slow confirmation must of the online wallets now are offering higher fees(effect would be we can sent micro payments) so f*ck those miners who are doing this act

I was thinking that Bitfury are spamming on purpose. Why else is the output and input address the same and collected by Bitfury?

i don't know how i've missed this before (it was mentioned to me before too!). anyways thanks, i have added this to the list of all spam attacks in my topic:
Mother of all spam attacks on bitcoin network! proof? (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1776143.0)

What i do not understand is that why would they do that,why are they spamming with invalid transactions and what is the motivation for them to do that,if they want to showcase that the bitcoin is really slow then they will be loosing the value of coins they are holding,do they want to push the core team and create some sort of emergency by frustrating normal users.

judging from the transaction data that many transactions that the number of shipments slightly but wearing a big fee, so that makes the transaction in addition to the full transaction strangely always back and forth to address his own wallet which carried out continuously. That makes the transaction so slow

WoW !! I hope this doesn't cause trouble to the whole blockchain and that they start decreasing.
Otherwise I can only see a chaos coming.

EDIT

They are already down to 3k. Thanks God. My bad :)