Do you think SatoshiDice is blockchain spam? Drop their TX's - Solution inside

[Nemesis]

The only stupid things I'm seing here are your replies...

No, It doesn't save HD space, and I never said it would. You have the reading skill of a kindergartten baby. I said BANDWIDTH and CPU CYCLES. And yes, those will be saved by not relaying the transactions and by not verifying their signatures.
Stop making a fool of yourself, Nemesis... And BTW, take YOUR head out of YOUR ass, mmmmkay?

What bandwidth does it save Psy?

CPU cycles are so precious.... i love the idea of saving some.

Hint: you wasted more bandwidth and CPU cycles (LOL) by typing this rubbish response. what a pile.....
 

[Severian]

As per my request, Gmaxwell wrote a patch to apply to the Bitcoin client

Thanks for this. Looks like I'll be learning how to recompile/patch the client on a Linux box. I can't wait to see what I screw up.

[Blazr]

SatoshiDice is wasting bitcoin network resources and making gambler's pay for it. They've stress tested enough now and done enough damage, it about time they start using the system correctly, I am unable to run a bitcoin node anymore as if I do, my girlfriend gets mad because "Netflix is all fuzzy and keeps freezing", thanks to all of the SD spammy transactions.

Not only that I hope they realize all those 1 satoshi payments they make are unspendable in the current fee structure, they're simply throwing away money that nobody can spend.

They need to put a proper deposit/withdrawal system in place, not only will they save A LOT!! on fees, they'll save network resources and have a lesser impact on the environment.

[justusranvier]

Good plan - why implement changes to make the network more scalable when you could snipe at Satoshi dice instead?

[Raoul Duke]

Your choice to block them over any other arbitrary group of transactions, under the false pretense of "avoiding blockchain bloat," is retarded.

Please, moron, quote me on that "avoiding blockchain bloat" pretense i have.
Curious to see where I said that... Or just get the confirmation you make things up as you go...

And Nemesis, you're a tool... If you have nothing valid to say, get lost.

[Severian]

Seriously, if you want to play cops and impose your moral views on others:

I don't get that sense. Psy makes a good point: SD is making money off the rest of us and giving us nothing in return, except for the miners. They're getting paid for the spam we all have to carry and we're not.

I have no issue with folks making money. I dislike people making money at the expense of others.

[solex]

I think satoshiDICE is providing a valuable service. If one little gambling website can bring Bitcoin to it's knees (hyperbole), then Bitcoin is clearly not ready for the levels of adoption some, including myself, hope for.

satoshiDICE - stress testing Bitcoin since April 2012.

Exactly. My view 100%.

I am dismayed that SD has found a flaw in Bitcoin such that 50% of its volume is from an intrinsic or newly enabled source, not by displacing previous real-world fiat/paypal/mc transaction flow. This is compounded because, potentially, SD could absorb 100% of Bitcoin's capacity within a year.

The benefit is that this has occurred within the Bitcoin community user-base. So lessons can be learned from it and improvements made. SD does not have to be killed off, just tamed 

[Raoul Duke]

Thanks for this. Looks like I'll be learning how to recompile/patch the client on a Linux box. I can't wait to see what I screw up.

That makes 2 of us.
Altho I don't expect to screw up anything, just to fail or not

[Littleshop]

I understand you. But you, being a miner, are being rewarded for those transactions. Me, being just a regular node and a non-miner, I'm being ripped of my resources with no reward whatsoever.
In fact all I have are disadvantages: Higher fees, delayed transactions and resource hogging.
Not wanting to hurt them, only wanting them not to hurt me.

Again, not saying you do not have the right to do this but it is pretty dumb.

You DO get something from relaying those transactions.  You get others relaying YOUR transactions without discrimination.  You are working to break that part of bitcoin.  Just like using bittorrent and LEACHING only is in your short term interest, it saves bandwidth too.  It is not in your long term interest, well at least if you want to continue using an UNCENSORED BITCOIN.  

[paraipan]

I understand you. But you, being a miner, are being rewarded for those transactions. Me, being just a regular node and a non-miner, I'm being ripped of my resources with no reward whatsoever.
In fact all I have are disadvantages: Higher fees, delayed transactions and resource hogging.
Not wanting to hurt them, only wanting them not to hurt me.

Again, not saying you do not have the right to do this but it is pretty dumb.

You DO get something from relaying those transactions.  You get others relaying YOUR transactions without discrimination.  You are working to break that part of bitcoin.  Just like using bittorrent and LEACHING only is in your short term interest, it saves bandwidth too.  It is not in your long term interest, well at least if you want to continue using an UNCENSORED BITCOIN.  

Cut the slack Littleshop, everyone is free to do as they please, miners and users included. Nobody is censoring anybody, is just having the choice to "ignore". The transaction will still get into the blockchain if miners include them anyways, but users that don't want to waste CPU cycles and bandwidth are free to do so. So your point is?

[grue]

The blockchain needs to grow to be able to handle these so-called "spam" transactions that are following the rules of the protocol, even if you disagree with them from a moral/sensibility perspective.

Bitcoin is all about open access and anti-censorship. It is kind of grating to hear people say "these stupid gamblers are ruining BTC, we need to block all SD transactions!!". Go somewhere else to create your own anti-spam/anti-gambling currency. Oh and in case you are wondering, I have never used any BTC gambling site. But I believe no one should have the power to control how one utilizes his or her resources.

you're arguing that your computer resources should be used to relay gambling/spam/drug dealing/whatever activities you don't agree with just because it's "censorship"

[Severian]

 You are working to break that part of bitcoin.

Are miners doing the same when they ignore transactions because it will cost them money or its not worth it? Bitcoin is a market as well as a currency and a network. If a part of the market says, "I choose not to consent to the use of my time and resources in these kinds of transactions", why should anyone care?

[Raoul Duke]

The blockchain needs to grow to be able to handle these so-called "spam" transactions that are following the rules of the protocol, even if you disagree with them from a moral/sensibility perspective.

Bitcoin is all about open access and anti-censorship. It is kind of grating to hear people say "these stupid gamblers are ruining BTC, we need to block all SD transactions!!". Go somewhere else to create your own anti-spam/anti-gambling currency. Oh and in case you are wondering, I have never used any BTC gambling site. But I believe no one should have the power to control how one utilizes his or her resources.

you're arguing that your computer resources should be used to relay gambling/spam/drug dealing/whatever activities you don't agree with just because it's "censorship"

Bitcointalk user 100x is hereby sentenced to run a Tor exit node without his approval, given that it's not a problem for him to relay stuff and it could be seen as censhorship by closed minded persons as, well, 100x.

[solex]

SatoshiDice is wasting bitcoin network resources and making gambler's pay for it. They've stress tested enough now and done enough damage, it about time they start using the system correctly, ...
They need to put a proper deposit/withdrawal system in place, not only will they save A LOT!! on fees, they'll save network resources and have a lesser impact on the environment.

Blazr, this is no good. Yes SD can be asked nicely to internalize everything like Mt. Gox and other big sites, but it won't stop SD2, SD3 and SD4 emerging, owned by persons unknown who will be just as capable of bringing Bitcoin to its knees.

There needs to be an improvement to the spam-filtering which keeps SD type messaging to a controlled percentage (20%?,30%?, whatever%) of the current throughput capacity.

[niko]

Seriously, if you want to play cops and impose your moral views on others:

I don't get that sense. Psy makes a good point: SD is making money off the rest of us and giving us nothing in return, except for the miners. They're getting paid for the spam we all have to carry and we're not.

I have no issue with folks making money. I dislike people making money at the expense of others.

But isn't every transaction you verify and relay using up some of your resources? How is SD different from SR or MtGox or bitmit or anyone else using Bitcoin? This is what peer-to-peer means. Take some time to think about it. You want to use p2p technology, but don't want to contribute resources?

[Littleshop]

 You are working to break that part of bitcoin.

Are miners doing the same when they ignore transactions because it will cost them money or its not worth it? Bitcoin is a market as well as a currency and a network. If a part of the market says, "I choose not to consent to the use of my time and resources in these kinds of transactions", why should anyone care?

Ignoring transactions because they do contain or do not contain fees is part of the free market.   

I am talking about SPECIFICALLY dropping transactions from a specific person REGARDLESS OF FEES. 

[Littleshop]

I understand you. But you, being a miner, are being rewarded for those transactions. Me, being just a regular node and a non-miner, I'm being ripped of my resources with no reward whatsoever.
In fact all I have are disadvantages: Higher fees, delayed transactions and resource hogging.
Not wanting to hurt them, only wanting them not to hurt me.

Again, not saying you do not have the right to do this but it is pretty dumb.

You DO get something from relaying those transactions.  You get others relaying YOUR transactions without discrimination.  You are working to break that part of bitcoin.  Just like using bittorrent and LEACHING only is in your short term interest, it saves bandwidth too.  It is not in your long term interest, well at least if you want to continue using an UNCENSORED BITCOIN.  

Cut the slack Littleshop, everyone is free to do as they please, miners and users included. Nobody is censoring anybody, is just having the choice to "ignore". The transaction will still get into the blockchain if miners include them anyways, but users that don't want to waste CPU cycles and bandwidth are free to do so. So your point is?

I have said exactly what you have said.  Everyone is free to do as they please.  And everyone is free to criticize someone for doing something stupid. 

Dropping transactions from a specific person IS censorship.  Just like VISA/MC do.  So go ahead... be like them. 

[Raoul Duke]

 You are working to break that part of bitcoin.

Are miners doing the same when they ignore transactions because it will cost them money or its not worth it? Bitcoin is a market as well as a currency and a network. If a part of the market says, "I choose not to consent to the use of my time and resources in these kinds of transactions", why should anyone care?

Ignoring transactions because they do contain or do not contain fees is part of the free market.   

I am talking about SPECIFICALLY dropping transactions from a specific person REGARDLESS OF FEES. 

It's free market also.

[Severian]

You want to use p2p technology, but don't want to contribute resources?

That should be being asked of SD, not of me. I give more resources to the network than I take. SD pays the miners and the winners of their game but takes more from the network than it gives overall.

"But SD adds value to the network because people want to obtain bitcoins in order to play it." is an argument I've heard in defense of SD. It's a bad argument. It's the same X number of people/SDbots throwing the same bitcoins back and forth all day long. It looks like impressive traffic but it reminds me of this joke:

Two economists were walking down the street one day when they passed two large piles of dog shit.

The first economist said to the other, "I'll pay you $20,000 to eat one of those piles of shit." The second one agrees and chooses one of the piles and eats it. The first economist pays him his $20,000.

Then the second economist says, "I'll pay you $20,000 to eat the other pile of shit." The first one says okay, and eats the shit. The second economist pays him the $20,000.

They resume walking down the street.

After a while, the second economist says, "You know, I don't feel very good. We both have the same amount of money as when we started. The only difference is we've both eaten shit."

The first economist says: "Ah, but you're ignoring the fact that we've engaged in $40,000 worth of trade!"

[Raoul Duke]

The blockchain needs to grow to be able to handle these so-called "spam" transactions that are following the rules of the protocol, even if you disagree with them from a moral/sensibility perspective.

Bitcoin is all about open access and anti-censorship. It is kind of grating to hear people say "these stupid gamblers are ruining BTC, we need to block all SD transactions!!". Go somewhere else to create your own anti-spam/anti-gambling currency. Oh and in case you are wondering, I have never used any BTC gambling site. But I believe no one should have the power to control how one utilizes his or her resources.

you're arguing that your computer resources should be used to relay gambling/spam/drug dealing/whatever activities you don't agree with just because it's "censorship"

Bitcointalk user 100x is hereby sentenced to run a Tor exit node without his approval, given that it's not a problem for him to relay stuff and it could be seen as censhorship by closed minded persons as, well, 100x.

No, your analogy would be better if I was already running a Tor exit node, and you were recommending that I block traffic to certain sites (which would be impossible, due to encryption at each step, if I recall properly).

But I'm not recommending anyone to do anything. I'm showing them they have the option, and it's something which is very possible to do. The only persons trying to convince anyone of their "righteous" view points are you guys who don't agree with this hack.
I know you guys would prefer a SD/BTC doomsday thread where I tried to convince everyone this is the right thing to do, but this one isn't it.

I even made a call to action in the thread title for the users who thought SD is blockchain spam, but you guys all flocked here en masse, not really sure why, if the message wasn't intended for you...