If *someone* is stressing BTC... Do you support stressing *someone*?

[S4VV4S]

OP changed in order to edit their name out for less publicity to them.

I don't know how much help that is going to be since their name has been mentioned several times in this thread.

[1714946089]

1714946089

[1714946089]

1714946089

[1714946089]

1714946089

[1714946089]

1714946089

[hdbuck]

Its war. Talion's law prevails.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

OP changed in order to edit their name out for less publicity to them.

I don't agree with what they're doing, I think it's ridiculous, we all know what's going to happen. It's not a 'stress test', it's a 'spam fest'. It's a bull shit, spamming, self promoting waste of time.

I don't know why they think they have the right to do this.

[LiteCoinGuy]

@q34857

good analysis, thx.

[Mickeyb]

OP changed in order to edit their name out for less publicity to them.

I don't agree with what they're doing, I think it's ridiculous, we all know what's going to happen. It's not a 'stress test', it's a 'spam fest'. It's a bull shit, spamming, self promoting waste of time.

I don't know why they think they have the right to do this.

Well anybody can do anything they want, specially with the Bitcoin network since it is decentralized and let's you do so with it.

It is not that I approve what they are doing. I think also there is some hidden agenda behind them wasting the amount of BTC that they said they will use. It might be very well for self promotion. If this thing will last as they said, 30 days, I am sure everyone in the Bitcoin world and many outsiders will know about Coinwallet.

[Herbert2020]

OP changed in order to edit their name out for less publicity to them.

I don't agree with what they're doing, I think it's ridiculous, we all know what's going to happen. It's not a 'stress test', it's a 'spam fest'. It's a bull shit, spamming, self promoting waste of time.

I don't know why they think they have the right to do this.

Well anybody can do anything they want, specially with the Bitcoin network since it is decentralized and let's you do so with it.

It is not that I approve what they are doing. I think also there is some hidden agenda behind them wasting the amount of BTC that they said they will use. It might be very well for self promotion. If this thing will last as they said, 30 days, I am sure everyone in the Bitcoin world and many outsiders will know about Coinwallet.

i agree with LFC_Bitcoin, it doesn't matter that bitcoin network is open to everyone and it is decentralized. what they are doing (or planning to do) is a spam attack and they are trying to hide it behind the fancy word of "test".
since it is harming the network by delaying other users transactions then it is not right.

[NeuroticFish]

Although I know that these "stress tests" are mostly spam attacks with not-very-nice background (even promoting services "not affected" by "issues") and even if somebody may hate me for telling this, I think that Bitcoin needs such tests from time to time because they can reveal true problems too.

The one coming into my mind is that not all pools play fair and include as many transactions as possible (and I don't talk about the 0-fee transactions).

So yeah, I'd say let them "test". If the devs fix the problems (and this one doesn't need any block size increase!) at some point their tests will pass unnoticed or barely noticed. And then we will know that Bitcoin reached another level of maturity and the spams will end because it will become pointless and boring to sustain them.

[Lauda]

Although I know that these "stress tests" are mostly spam attacks with not-very-nice background (even promoting services "not affected" by "issues") and even if somebody may hate me for telling this, I think that Bitcoin needs such tests from time to time because they can reveal true problems too.

The one coming into my mind is that not all pools play fair and include as many transactions as possible (and I don't talk about the 0-fee transactions).

So yeah, I'd say let them "test". If the devs fix the problems (and this one doesn't need any block size increase!) at some point their tests will pass unnoticed or barely noticed. And then we will know that Bitcoin reached another level of maturity and the spams will end because it will become pointless and boring to sustain them.

I don't hate you for stating that, but you're wrong. Exactly what would test-net be for then? Having fun? This is not a 'test' of any kind but rather a planned attack. Obviously 'someone' is going to have financial gain because of such an attack. If you want to play around and run various tests then do it on the network that was specifically designed for that.

A lot of people have complained during the previous test. We will have to go through this all over again and tell people to include even higher fees.
Update:
I doubt that the developers are going to reach a compromise soon. I would blame physics anytime. 

[NeuroticFish]

Although I know that these "stress tests" are mostly spam attacks with not-very-nice background (even promoting services "not affected" by "issues") and even if somebody may hate me for telling this, I think that Bitcoin needs such tests from time to time because they can reveal true problems too.

The one coming into my mind is that not all pools play fair and include as many transactions as possible (and I don't talk about the 0-fee transactions).

So yeah, I'd say let them "test". If the devs fix the problems (and this one doesn't need any block size increase!) at some point their tests will pass unnoticed or barely noticed. And then we will know that Bitcoin reached another level of maturity and the spams will end because it will become pointless and boring to sustain them.

I don't hate you for stating that, but you're wrong. Exactly what would test-net be for then? Having fun? This is not a 'test' of any kind but rather a planned attack. Obviously 'someone' is going to have financial gain because of such an attack. If you want to play around and run various tests then do it on the network that was specifically designed for that.

A lot of people have complained during the previous test. We will have to go through this all over again and tell people to include even higher fees.

Testnet and "real world" may behave way different with such tests. With the issue I talked about, I doubt that on testnet some miners are fair and some not. Would you have found that out on testnet?!
I stated from start that I believe too that such attacks are evil and for some groups' gains.

I know that a lot complained on the last test. And I know that businesses should not be affected by such attacks.
But then I'd say let's ask the devs stop the block size war and focus on the real problems.

Whose problem is if your boat has a hole in it and the water is pouring in? It's the sea's problem that it has too much water, it's the laws of physics unfair, or you should fix your boat? (sorry if my English was not correct in this)

[gentlemand]

Looks like they've retired the idea.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3k6o07/coinwalleteu_bitcoin_stress_test_fraud_accusation/cuvk26k

That's if it's genuinely them on Reddit. Quite possibly not.

[btcdrak]

Looks like they've retired the idea.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3k6o07/coinwalleteu_bitcoin_stress_test_fraud_accusation/cuvk26k

That's if it's genuinely them on Reddit. Quite possibly not.

They also posted here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1175321

I think they rethought their criminal liability in the face of real legal opinions http://www.coindesk.com/bitcoin-spam-tests-could-violate-uk-law/

Of course now they have released the keys of free money which will take many megabytes to spend... sigh.

[mallard]

Why was the title changed to *someone* ?

[gentlemand]

Why was the title changed to *someone* ?

Read above. So as not to give them publicity, not that they need it because they don't have any intention of gaining actual customers as far as I can tell.

[OROBTC]

Why was the title changed to *someone* ?

LOL!

Maybe because coinwallet.eu is shaping up (stopping their stupid Blockchain Attacks)?  It looks like coinwallet has come under some pressure (but I have not read above link here at bitcointalk).

Or else perhaps thread author doesn't want any problems from THEM?


EDIT: 10-4, gentlemand.  I just now read above.

[mallard]

Why was the title changed to *someone* ?

Read above. So as not to give them publicity, not that they need it because they don't have any intention of gaining actual customers as far as I can tell.

I don't think that they will gain any customers -- their site isn't even functional.

[CohibAA]

Come on Bitcointalk, where's your research face?
...

I've also requested for the WHOIS information on the domain coinwallet.eu to be unmasked by the registry.

Excellent post, thank you!

 

[fabula]

Hovewer,too much stress test on btc.

[mallard]

Hovewer,too much stress test on btc.

Last time the network handled it quite well.

[Habeler876]

Hovewer,too much stress test on btc.

Last time the network handled it quite well.

The fact that at any point someone is able to "force" users to input a higher fee just in order to get their transaction processed in reasonable time is not
something i would call quite well. The point of bitcoin is to offer minimum fee and processing time for any transaction, anything else just makes it loose it's purpuse.

[Lituation]

It looks like miners rejected some transactions. Mempool is not empty but they didn't accept all transactions in back to back blocks since one hour.