|
1342
|
Bitcoin / Development & Technical Discussion / Re: [SOFT-FORK] Bitcoin fork "No Forced TX Fee" v0.7.2 avaiable
|
on: March 09, 2013, 09:31:01 AM
|
Can we have a fork where someone is hit by lightning every time they decide to sit in the middle of traffic to express their freedom?
Let me get your point straight: Who should be hit by lightning specifically ? I think he means those people who manifest themselves by occupying roads, bridges, etc., so that would be something like 80% or 90% of the population of my country, where almost everyone done it at least once in life lol |
|
|
|
|
1343
|
Economy / Service Discussion / Re: Official Gox / CoinLab Integration and Transition FAQ
|
on: March 09, 2013, 05:56:24 AM
|
Does that mean I can still create and redeem a MTGEUR code after April 10th?
I just got this answered on #mtgox IRC: <MagicalTux> as US customer, it will not be possible to have a balance in anything else than BTC/USD/CAD Funny shit  No inter-currency arbitrage on Mtgox for you US guys. Weird, it is like the govt. hates its citizens or something ... drone strikes, bank account snooping, wiretaps, .... I may be wrong, but I have a little suspicion that it has more to do with Coinlab's bank accounts being only in USD/CAD and them not wanting, or their bank not having, accounts denominated in other currencies than with government interference. AFAIK paypal doesn't limit the currencies US users can have balances in, so why would coinlab?  |
|
|
|
|
1344
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Do you think SatoshiDice is blockchain spam? Drop their TX's - Solution inside
|
on: March 09, 2013, 05:46:56 AM
|
Think about music. I would never pay as much as one cent per play of a song, but I might be willing to pay 0.0000001btc/song. The ability to have really truly small transactions is one of the benefits that makes bitcoin worth using over the traditional payment systems.
That's the problem, your example becomes a fallacy if it costs the Bitcoin network 0.0000047 to process your 0.0000001 payment. This might be fine if it was just you, but not 10 million people doing the same thing! Why would it cost 0.0000047? Who says the cost has to be that high? Do you have any real numbers showing how much it actually costs to do a transaction? And why not have 10 million people doing that? Don't you want bitcoin to grow? The idea that we should limit its growth seems absurd to me. The idea that we should limit ourselves to do whatever you think it's right seems absurd to me. Is anyone forcing you to use the patch? It's possible to do and not against the Bitcoin protocol, so deal with it. People will do it with or without your approval. Like we needed it... |
|
|
|
|
1346
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Do you think SatoshiDice is blockchain spam? Drop their TX's - Solution inside
|
on: March 09, 2013, 02:39:51 AM
|
Now this I agree with. But it would be gentlemanly for Erik Vorhees to disable the generation of SatoshiDICE spam, or choose one of the alternatives I provided to notify players of losing bets. At least until the developers can patch this defect.
I think your sub 1k transactions are spammy. Everything under 1k BTC should be blocked, lets do this! I think that is a fair limit, honestly. Go for it! You just need to change the patch values... |
|
|
|
|
1347
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Do you think SatoshiDice is blockchain spam? Drop their TX's - Solution inside
|
on: March 09, 2013, 02:01:42 AM
|
EDIT : Also this patch is pointless, you probably spent more CPU cycles browsing this thread than you'll spend verifying SD txes for a full year.
Can you do the math you did to reach this conclusion and show us? Or did you just pulled it out of your ass? Also: It's my computer, I'll spend my CPU cycles as I see fit, and verifying SD tx's before they get included in a block isn't what I want to spend my CPU cycles on, unlike browsing this forum, here I'll spend all CPU cycles it takes without even thinking about it. See the difference? Any counter-argument? |
|
|
|
|
1348
|
Economy / Scam Accusations / Re: SCAM - Coinabul owe me 81btc
|
on: March 09, 2013, 01:58:10 AM
|
I can't believe they haven't fucking refunded yet. Will not ever do business with Coinabul after reading this.
Don't forget that Jon works at or co-owns BitcoinStore.com also. I know I'm not buying anything there now. inb4 they try to pull the same stunt. I'll just buy on real shops who will let me chargeback non-delivered merchandise. |
|
|
|
|
1350
|
Bitcoin / Mining / Re: Someone just paid 94.35425882 BTC in transaction fee
|
on: March 08, 2013, 11:06:36 PM
|
Eleuthria has been an upstanding and respectable member of the bitcoin community for as long as I can remember, and I am touched he gave back the transaction fees he received by mistake in that block that was mined.
OK, don't let us speculate. What did you mean by: Ahahaha you so funny  It was simply low level humour postulating on what the pool would do with the money which obviously you did not find funny. I understand people are very touchy with respect to transactions on this forum given the number of scams constantly going on, but lumping me with them given my history with bitcoin and free software when I'm not running any business venture and have only ever delivered code in response to donations is a bit harsh. On the other hand, the mere presence of this forum thread may well change the pool's response to this transaction error. Thank you! |
|
|
|
|
1351
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Do you think SatoshiDice is blockchain spam? Drop their TX's - Solution inside
|
on: March 08, 2013, 10:50:15 PM
|
As per my request, Gmaxwell wrote a patch to apply to the Bitcoin client that will drop all transactions to SatoshiDice and simply not relay or verify them. It will also drop all transactions that are less than 10,000 satoshis in value, so you might want to change that value to 1 or 2 satoshis, to only drop SD's losing bets tx's. Let's show them how the free market works and that not only miners have a say on this subject! diff --git a/src/main.cpp b/src/main.cpp
index 9a06dbf..d3fba73 100644
--- a/src/main.cpp
+++ b/src/main.cpp
@@ -384,8 +384,16 @@ bool CTransaction::IsStandard() const
BOOST_FOREACH(const CTxOut& txout, vout) {
if (!::IsStandard(txout.scriptPubKey))
return false;
+ if (txout.scriptPubKey.size() > 6
+ && txout.scriptPubKey[0] == OP_DUP
+ && txout.scriptPubKey[3] == 0x06
+ && txout.scriptPubKey[4] == 0xf1
+ && txout.scriptPubKey[5] == 0xb6)
+ return error("CTransaction::IsStandard : ignoring transaction with 1dice output");
if (txout.nValue == 0)
- return false;
+ return error("CTransaction::IsStandard : ignoring transaction with 0 value output");
+ if (txout.nValue <= 10000)
+ return error("CTransaction::IsStandard : ignoring transaction with dust output");
}
return true;
}
You may not be interested in the if (txout.nValue <= 10000) test, though it also gets the dice you-lost transactions and other UXTO set bloating flood. This will make the node not relay or mine these transactions. It will, of course, still accept them in blocks. you should get the patch of Luke-Jr, this only ignores tx's TO SD, payments back arent being ignored and as we know there will always be 2 tx's for each gamble try. reference: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=149668.msg1595281#msg1595281EDIT: u still process winnings because gmaxwell's patch only blocks losses. Winning payments don't bug me and there is no reason to drop them. But the loss transactions will be blocked from relaying by the following rule, which in this case drops every transaction that is equal or less than 10,000 satoshis. I edited this part to only drop tx's with 5 or less satoshis. Still need to install all the deps to compile it now and see how well it works. if (txout.nValue <= 10000)
+ return error("CTransaction::IsStandard : ignoring transaction with dust output"); But anyway, I will include Luke-jr's patch in the OP and people can choose between them. |
|
|
|
|
1353
|
Bitcoin / Mining / Re: Someone just paid 94.35425882 BTC in transaction fee
|
on: March 08, 2013, 07:13:21 PM
|
Earlier this year, I mistakenly paid 90+ coins in transaction fee when playing with createrawtransaction. Fortunately that time I was playing with terracoind. The owner of the 90+ bitcoins might be a victim of createrawtransaction, too.
I suspect those raw transactions will be a trap for many many more  |
|
|
|
|
1354
|
Bitcoin / Mining / Re: Soft block size limit reached, action required by YOU
|
on: March 08, 2013, 07:12:09 PM
|
If a means isn't found for the average Joe to be compensated for running a full node, they are going to start dropping out as they perceive abusive services like Satoshi Dice costing them money.
Finnaly someone who understands the difference between using and abusing |
|
|
|
|
1357
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Do you think SatoshiDice is blockchain spam? Drop their TX's - Solution inside
|
on: March 08, 2013, 06:25:06 PM
|
ANYBODY WHOS NOT A DUMMY
SATOSHI DICE IS A BUSINESS
AKA MAKING MONEY IN TRASANCTIN FEES
AND MOST IPORTANTLY BLOCK CHAIN DILUTION FOR MAKING IT HARDER TO TRACE TRANSANCTIONS
INDUCING MORE NOISE IN THE CHAIN FOR CURIOUS DUCHES WHO LIKE TO TRACE SHEAT
OK smartass, tell us where does SatoshiDice makes money in TX fees... Also, your caps lock is broken it seems. Only problem is you need a big enough transaction so the bigger outputs cancel the fee for the smaller ones. I'm not familiar enough with the minimum fee and priority rules to know where the cutoff is. I'm pretty sure I've sent no-fee transactions with two inputs before though. How big would the output need to be? You need to do some math. It goes somewhat like this: 1 BTC input can be spent as a 1 BTC output with 0 fees 24hrs after you receive it. Now do the math for 1 satoshi... This is only a simplifed explanation, there may be other rules involved. |
|
|
|
|
1358
|
Other / Off-topic / Re: Is blockchain.info broken?
|
on: March 08, 2013, 06:20:44 PM
|
Crazy, they're updating servers.
Did they really just have the last server running on a mac mini?
That has to be a joke.
Yeah, they've been using that pic for a long time, it's a joke. So they are upgrading servers or its a static image? Old page from the time they did indeed change servers, 6 or more months ago. |
|
|
|
|
1359
|
Bitcoin / Bitcoin Discussion / Re: Do you think SatoshiDice is blockchain spam? Drop their TX's - Solution inside
|
on: March 08, 2013, 06:12:13 PM
|
Please explain to me why anyone would spend 10,000 satoshi to send 1 satoshi? They wouldn't, but that's not what he was talking about. If I'm spending half of a 10 BTC output and have a 1 satoshi output laying around I could add it as a second input to the transaction and send 5.00000001 to the change output instead of 5.00000000 Do this enough and the dust problem is solved. Only problem is you need a big enough transaction so the bigger outputs cancel the fee for the smaller ones. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
