Wrong. Slow connection users would have hard time catching up, and the dust would have to be archived forever.

Now
11426
 18.63 MB



Another stress test?

25.5 MB?

I see just 9286 tx and 15.05 MB

slightly above normal but nothing out of ordinary

EDIT: it's monday, one of the busier days, a little bit of commerce activity is nothing unusual

On My node :  5580  Unconfirmed transactions
More than expected, but OK

Your fees are too small. Best fee now is 15 satoshi per byte.

(Fee: 0.00002376 BTC - Size: 372 bytes)

You should use 15 x 372 bytes =   5580 satoshi fee = 0.00005580 Bitcoin fee



(Fee: 0.00001587 BTC - Size: 225 bytes)


225 bytes x 15 = 0.00003375 BTC FEE

Thanks to censorship, a 100% consensus has been reached in order to activate an effective block size decrease to 0.5MB on 1.4.2016

This highly anticipated fee event will boost miner revenues and serve as a bold warning to the illuminati behind the stress test.

After a successfull activation, the censorship on all social media will be lifted. This will cause a new consensus to be reached, for an urgent block size increase.

The subsequent massive block size increase will allow us to raise block size by 200%. This means, that the block cap will grow from 0.5 MB to 1 MB.

We expect that this massive increase will have a huge effect on the public image of Bitcoin, on the social media and will trigger a new major wave of adoption.

At 14.9 satoshi per byte, I experience no flood.

The reason of high fee could be for spam of extremely large transactions.

DO IT

Now you have every possible advice

that's one likely explaination

    [1] Lightning Network by Joseph Poon and Thaddeus Dryja (website), github repository (golang)
    [2] Deployable Lightning by Rusty Russel (Blockstream), github repository (C)
    [3] Thunder Network by Mats Jerratsch (Blockchain.info), github repository (Java)

The way i see it , the sidechain approach makes sense for now . It cannot be seriously used until the malleability is fixed by segwit. Once that's done, lightning will be developed for the real blockchain

Anybody can settle the tied up funds anytime. The question is , would the on-chain confirmation regulated? If anybody can prevent the channel closure from confirmation, then the same individual could effectively freeze any bitcoin even under the current rules.

Only difference is the channel closure has a specific close time window, so yes, the risk is slightly larger, but not significantly. We'll see

Why? Storm in a teacup? Satoshi vision violated? 4 cent fees unacceptable?

Wait for Segwit deployment in a few months. Don't forget to scoop up your loan advances.

If the network ends tits up, you'll have your perfect investment opportunity.

Then HOOOOLD FOR THE LONGEST TIME.

isn't it?

lol imho satoshi is now in some pub browsing this drama on his phone. Man he must be laughing his ass now.

As Seen on Reddit™

A bunch of shills on reddit and we're getting endless heated discussions, while Bitcoin operates correctly.

Everyone knew the rules for how long? 5 years? Everyone is aware of the perpetual "stress test" causing the blocks appear full.

Absolutely everyone knows about the Satoshi's 1MB rule, nobody even dared to complain when it was introduced during the initial spam tests.

Now people come here crying about 4 cent fees. Keep settling your pocket changes on exchanges or in Doge, crybabies.

Fine. You may like other network, Paypal maybe, or Doge? Where charismatic leaders or users respectively decide what gets added.

In a cryptocurrency, miners always have the final say in what gets added and what not.

This classic rebellion is completely pointless. The core team haven't failed at all. They are delivering and will deliver.

It's time to engineer and deploy SegWit. I'm confident it can be developed and deployed correctly. If that fails, and developers mismanage this, then it's turn for the haters to express their concerns and assemble their own team.

And what about that martin shrek