1. i would suggests that if the user feel there is enough full node currently running he wont bother running 1 more... only if node count becomes dangerously low would a user do what you are suggesting. running a full node isn't exactly a lot of fun. 2. i have more insight going to blockchain.info. 3. you don't need a full node to import a wallet. there giving away 0.5BTC in each key?  They're spamming really small inputs to try to "stress test" the network by giving away the money. Hundreds of people are trying to spend them and it's filling up mempool, but it's not really working like they wanted it to.sounds like they are spamming the network just fine, whats more would they like? anyone experiencing any problem? all good here  Bitcoin eating that shit up like snacks. miners are happy. ya that is nice to see i bet a good % of the spam is what is stuck in the mempool hopefully all miners are favoring normal looking tx's |
|
|
|
60% of network traffic is spam.
20% of network traffic is micro transactions.
Make those sending less then 5 cents pay 1 cent and cut out all the transaction less then 1 cent and we won't have to worry about this issue for another 10 years.
most tx are >100$ most of the tx are not smap your making shit up. Exactly, just go to blockchain.info and watch the transactions. There's not even close to that many spam and micro transactions. i'm there now and i'm seeing alot more low value TX going by... but then again bitcoin is under the most massive spam attack of all time. that might have something to do with it. |
|
|
|
1MB limit will lead to higher fees, at one point only very large TX made by large entities will happen on the main chain. some people say that's fine, bitcoin is gold not pocket money. fine, then tell me what is the incentive for home users to run a full node when they can't even use the network? there is none, so they wont, only the large entities actually using the blockchain will run full nodes.
There are many incentives for home users to run a full node, but of course not everyone 1. By running a full node you can make the sure the network is robust and secure, thus indirectly secure your investment (Suppose you treat bitcoin like gold as long term investment). Unlike gold, which is protected by the law of nature, bitcoin need its user's protection by running full nodes, and anyone who have serious amount of coins will definitely run a full node 2. By running a full node you have a direct insight of what is going on in the network, which is good for following the development in bitcoin 3. By running a full node you have much more control of the transactions (Look at the current coinwallet.eu coin give out scheme, if you don't have full node you can not even receive those 0.5 bitcoins in each private key ) 1. i would suggests that if the user feel there is enough full node currently running he wont bother running 1 more... only if node count becomes dangerously low would a user do what you are suggesting. running a full node isn't exactly a lot of fun. 2. i have more insight going to blockchain.info. 3. you don't need a full node to import a wallet. there giving away 0.5BTC in each key? 1. What type of logic is that? Nodes will become commoditized and trivial to run. Running a full node coupled is still the most secure and private way to use Bitcoin. Some value these aspects a whole lot especially when dealing with millions of dollars. 2. But no privacy. 3. I suggest you go ahead and try sweeping one of these and see what happens. 1. look at the current BTc node count and explain it! people don't run full node unless they have to. 2. what? i can view blockchain.info in privacy... 3. I did! its throwing errors seems EVERYONE is trying to do the same thing and its overloading them.  |
|
|
|
1. i would suggests that if the user feel there is enough full node currently running he wont bother running 1 more... only if node count becomes dangerously low would a user do what you are suggesting. running a full node isn't exactly a lot of fun. 2. i have more insight going to blockchain.info. 3. you don't need a full node to import a wallet. there giving away 0.5BTC in each key? They're spamming really small inputs to try to "stress test" the network by giving away the money. Hundreds of people are trying to spend them and it's filling up mempool, but it's not really working like they wanted it to.sounds like they are spamming the network just fine, whats more would they like? |
|
|
|
60% of network traffic is spam.
20% of network traffic is micro transactions.
Make those sending less then 5 cents pay 1 cent and cut out all the transaction less then 1 cent and we won't have to worry about this issue for another 10 years.
most tx are >100$ most of the tx are not smap your making shit up. |
|
|
|
1MB limit will lead to higher fees, at one point only very large TX made by large entities will happen on the main chain. some people say that's fine, bitcoin is gold not pocket money. fine, then tell me what is the incentive for home users to run a full node when they can't even use the network? there is none, so they wont, only the large entities actually using the blockchain will run full nodes.
There are many incentives for home users to run a full node, but of course not everyone 1. By running a full node you can make the sure the network is robust and secure, thus indirectly secure your investment (Suppose you treat bitcoin like gold as long term investment). Unlike gold, which is protected by the law of nature, bitcoin need its user's protection by running full nodes, and anyone who have serious amount of coins will definitely run a full node 2. By running a full node you have a direct insight of what is going on in the network, which is good for following the development in bitcoin 3. By running a full node you have much more control of the transactions (Look at the current coinwallet.eu coin give out scheme, if you don't have full node you can not even receive those 0.5 bitcoins in each private key ) 1. i would suggests that if the user feel there is enough full node currently running he wont bother running 1 more... only if node count becomes dangerously low would a user do what you are suggesting. running a full node isn't exactly a lot of fun. 2. i have more insight going to blockchain.info. 3. you don't need a full node to import a wallet. there giving away 0.5BTC in each key? |
|
|
|
what is happening here, people starting to make sense  oh no iv been afk to long |
|
|
|
so who voted for big blocks= centralizing so far except brg?
It's reached the point now where it doesn't matter whether you think it should be large blocks or small blocks. Both options are equally contentious in their own way. We can't make it prohibitively expensive to transact on-chain, but at the same time, we can't make it prohibitively expensive in terms of resources required to run a node. We should move away from "big vs small" and focus on where to strike a balance between the two. It's the only sensible way forward. yup i vote for 1GB block limit |
|
|
|
|
pools allow for further decentralization of bitcoin mining by allowing small miners to continue to mine at such a high difficulty.
pools need to operate properly or else its users will leave and go to a pool that operate in the way they want.
there is nothing wrong with pools, pools are good.
|
|
|
|
|
what fee must we use for the next month as this spam gets cleared?
|
|
|
|
Then i typed this address into Blockchain info. and it says something like "unrecognized search pattern" what does that mean??
"unrecognized search pattern" means your public address you are trying to send to is invalid, this is why it failed to send. looks like "12PTTP9vAaHEP8LrYRnLwPtWZALr1Zwx5c" isnt a vaild bitcoin address where is this address from? your mycelium maybe be bugging, or you didn't copy the address properly ? this has nothing to do with fees... your TX will show up as unconfirmed instantly no matter what fee you pay or did not pay. |
|
|
|
If the economy and number of users grows, then I would suppose there will also be more people in whose best interest is to keep the network running.
Having an interest is not enough. We need to guarantee the ability for the common man to do so. The free market will solve your problem because there is an incentive. https://bitseed.orglook at that brg444, look at it closely its cost 160$, and i bet you we can get this sexy piece of shit to handle 4K TPS ( might need a HD upgrade tho) it might be challenging to get this very minimal computer to process 4KTPS but it would serve as a good benchmark as to what we would limit the requirement for a full node to be. To improve Decentralization, make full nodes cheaper. http://www.truthcoin.info/blog/measuring-decentralization/at 160$ the cost of the machine is negligible and in most cases 0 because the user already has a computer 5X more powerful. the bandwidth it would use is the costly part. unlimited bandwidth plan would be required. Sure, not a problem if you live in Montreal. If you live in China, India or other third world countries then you're just screwed I guess, too bad for you right third world countries can suck my big blocks. LOL no. they just need to get >1MBPS or just run there full node on the cloud.But them Chinese boys got more than 50% of the network so THEY are going to orphan you poor occidentals fucking Chinese people!  |
|
|
|
i cant get at the free money blockchain.info is overloaded with requests on these private keys...  |
|
|
|
If the economy and number of users grows, then I would suppose there will also be more people in whose best interest is to keep the network running.
Having an interest is not enough. We need to guarantee the ability for the common man to do so. The free market will solve your problem because there is an incentive. https://bitseed.orglook at that brg444, look at it closely its cost 160$, and i bet you we can get this sexy piece of shit to handle 4K TPS ( might need a HD upgrade tho) it might be challenging to get this very minimal computer to process 4KTPS but it would serve as a good benchmark as to what we would limit the requirement for a full node to be. To improve Decentralization, make full nodes cheaper. http://www.truthcoin.info/blog/measuring-decentralization/at 160$ the cost of the machine is negligible and in most cases 0 because the user already has a computer 5X more powerful. the bandwidth it would use is the costly part. unlimited bandwidth plan would be required. Sure, not a problem if you live in Montreal. If you live in China, India or other third world countries then you're just screwed I guess, too bad for you right third world countries can suck my big blocks. LOL no. they just need to get >1MBPS or just run there full node on the cloud. |
|
|
|
brg444 is the only one that voted bigger blocks |
|
|
|
If the economy and number of users grows, then I would suppose there will also be more people in whose best interest is to keep the network running.
Having an interest is not enough. We need to guarantee the ability for the common man to do so. The free market will solve your problem because there is an incentive. https://bitseed.orglook at that brg444, look at it closely its cost 160$, and i bet you we can get this sexy piece of shit to handle 4K TPS ( might need a HD upgrade tho) it might be challenging to get this very minimal computer to process 4KTPS but it would serve as a good benchmark as to what we would limit the requirement for a full node to be. To improve Decentralization, make full nodes cheaper. http://www.truthcoin.info/blog/measuring-decentralization/at 160$ the cost of the machine is negligible and in most cases 0 because the user already has a computer 5X more powerful. the bandwidth it would use is the costly part. unlimited bandwidth plan would be required. |
|
|
|
If the economy and number of users grows, then I would suppose there will also be more people in whose best interest is to keep the network running.
Having an interest is not enough. We need to guarantee the ability for the common man to do so. The free market will solve your problem because there is an incentive. https://bitseed.orglook at that brg444, look at it closely its cost 160$, and i bet you we can get this sexy piece of shit to handle 4K TPS ( might need a HD upgrade tho) it might be challenging to get this very minimal computer to process 4KTPS but it would serve as a good benchmark as to what we would limit the requirement for a full node to be. |
|
|
|
If the economy and number of users grows, then I would suppose there will also be more people in whose best interest is to keep the network running.
Having an interest is not enough. We need to guarantee the ability for the common man to do so. The free market will solve your problem because there is an incentive. https://bitseed.orglook at that brg444, look at it closely its cost 160$, and i bet you we can get this sexy piece of shit to handle 4K TPS ( might need a HD upgrade tho) |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
