transactions are not going or very slow

[rizzlarolla]

Transactions are getting slower and slower with every day as the number of transactions are getting more and more.

Wrong. The transaction speed has remained constant. You are talking about confirmation time, learn the difference already or stop posting false information.

Increasing fees won't be the solution because once we go in that way there will be no end to this.

Why would you want to end the rise of TX's processed today?

People pay 0.001btc or smth like that at the moment as a default fee and that's already too much for people who is gathering their bitcoins by satoshi's.

There is no such thing as a default fee. There's only a recommended satoshis/byte fee.

Completely unhelpful. Evasive. Non constructive. Uninformative.
Do you work for Core here?

[Lauda]

Completely unhelpful. Evasive. Non constructive. Uninformative.

Yes completely correct. If telling someone that "satoshis/byte" exists and should be used is "uninformative", then I don't know what is (when it comes to fees).

Do you work for Core here?

No. I'm just posting as any other regular user. Besides, that is not relevant.

[Btcvilla]

Meanwhile, transactions I sent and received hours ago still have zero confirms.

[Lauda]

Meanwhile, transactions I sent and received hours ago still have zero confirms.

Meanwhile, the transaction that I've sent today confirmed with the following block. If you have included a fee that is under the recommended fee in satoshis/byte, then your transaction will take longer than expected. This should be common knowledge.

[UngratefulTony]

Meanwhile, transactions I sent and received hours ago still have zero confirms.

Meanwhile, the transaction that I've sent today confirmed with the following block. If you have included a fee that is under the recommended fee in satoshis/byte, then your transaction will take longer than expected. This should be common knowledge.

See guys? If we can just keep the global use of bitcoin down to under 3.7 transactions per second, Theymos and Lauda can send BTC back and forth to each other without any delay or issue. Perhaps once a new user has their money mysteriously disappear for 36 hours, they will decide to use another cryptocurrency and stop spamming our Bitcoin.

There is no problem. This is fine.

[Carlton Banks]

Have any of you complainy-pants people come up with any good ideas (and remember I said "good")? No?


Well, the real achievers are actually doing the real work on the issue, and it takes time. Your idiot "duuuuuuuude" devs had their opportunity (they tried to take it way too early, lol), and spectacularly blew it.

Now, go talk to someone who's interested in stale "ideas" with zero merit, you've got some knots to undo from your delicate little panties.

[Btcvilla]

Meanwhile, transactions I sent and received hours ago still have zero confirms.

Meanwhile, the transaction that I've sent today confirmed with the following block. If you have included a fee that is under the recommended fee in satoshis/byte, then your transaction will take longer than expected. This should be common knowledge.

I used the recommended fee. If you haven't noticed, there's over 40,000 transactions unconfirmed, I don't think its a "not paying enough of a fee" issue.

[Carlton Banks]

Meanwhile, transactions I sent and received hours ago still have zero confirms.

Meanwhile, the transaction that I've sent today confirmed with the following block. If you have included a fee that is under the recommended fee in satoshis/byte, then your transaction will take longer than expected. This should be common knowledge.

I used the recommended fee. If you haven't noticed, there's over 40,000 transactions unconfirmed, I don't think its a "not paying enough of a fee" issue.

So, you support credible plans to scale the network up? Glad to have you on board. It may take a while, but doing the job correctly takes real ingenuity.

[Lauda]

I used the recommended fee. If you haven't noticed, there's over 40,000 transactions unconfirmed, I don't think its a "not paying enough of a fee" issue.

What recommended fee? Provide us with the TX ID. Yes, the issue is inadequate fee for your own transaction. If you are in any of these ranges or above, you should be fine:

As far as the mempool is concerned, mine was above 40k transactions for months. It comes down to the settings of the node.

[Btcvilla]

Meanwhile, transactions I sent and received hours ago still have zero confirms.

Meanwhile, the transaction that I've sent today confirmed with the following block. If you have included a fee that is under the recommended fee in satoshis/byte, then your transaction will take longer than expected. This should be common knowledge.

I used the recommended fee. If you haven't noticed, there's over 40,000 transactions unconfirmed, I don't think its a "not paying enough of a fee" issue.

So, you support credible plans to scale the network up? Glad to have you on board. It may take a while, but doing the job correctly takes real ingenuity.

The blocks are full, there's no denying it. There has to be bigger blocks, soon. I don't support how Gavin handled it though, but there has to be bigger blocks.

[rizzlarolla]

Meanwhile, transactions I sent and received hours ago still have zero confirms.

Meanwhile, the transaction that I've sent today confirmed with the following block. If you have included a fee that is under the recommended fee in satoshis/byte, then your transaction will take longer than expected. This should be common knowledge.

I used the recommended fee. If you haven't noticed, there's over 40,000 transactions unconfirmed, I don't think its a "not paying enough of a fee" issue.

If you feel you can post the tx id, or just state the size in bytes and fee paid we will know.
You may think you have paid the correct fee.

Under Cores dynamic fee market, you probably haven't.

[Carlton Banks]

The blocks are full, there's no denying it. There has to be bigger blocks, soon. I don't support how Gavin handled it though, but there has to be bigger blocks.

Ok then, explain now why increasing the blocksize constant is the only way to increase the transaction rate. Make it credible, a multitude of Bitcoin development experts know full-well that this is an entirely false premise, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, as it's not impossible that you're the software design genius that's just about to announce a major design breakthrough to the world. Let's hear your idea to scale the transaction rate.

[Lauda]

The blocks are full, there's no denying it. There has to be bigger blocks, soon. I don't support how Gavin handled it though, but there has to be bigger blocks.

That solves nothing. That does not even improve scalability. All it does it give a bit more headroom which can easily get filled with the spam that someone is pushing onto the network.

You may think you have paid the correct fee.

So if I think 1 cent is the right fee, don't blame me, blame the system? I'd not jump to conclusions without that TX ID.

[Btcvilla]

I have the fee set to 0.009BTC/kB in Electrum. I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that's a good amount.

[rizzlarolla]

The blocks are full, there's no denying it. There has to be bigger blocks, soon. I don't support how Gavin handled it though, but there has to be bigger blocks.

Ok then, explain now why increasing the blocksize constant is the only way to increase the transaction rate. Make it credible, a multitude of Bitcoin development experts know full-well that this is an entirely false premise, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, as it's not impossible that you're the software design genius that's just about to announce a major design breakthrough to the world. Let's hear your idea to scale the transaction rate.

You explain to us how Core this dynamic fee market is working

[Lauda]

I have the fee set to 0.009BTC/kB in Electrum. I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that's a good amount.

~6$ per Kilobyte of data? Are you sure that you did not forget a zero there? Please provide the transaction ID already or something is not right here.

[Btcvilla]

The blocks are full, there's no denying it. There has to be bigger blocks, soon. I don't support how Gavin handled it though, but there has to be bigger blocks.

That solves nothing. That does not even improve scalability. All it does it give a bit more headroom which can easily get filled with the spam that someone is pushing onto the network.

You may think you have paid the correct fee.

So if I think 1 cent is the right fee, don't blame me, blame the system? I'd not jump to conclusions without that TX ID.

I am blaming the system, a system which can be changed. If we have to pay 20 cents per transaction, there would be no reason to use Bitcoin over Paypal, in the eyes of the average consumer.

[matt4054]

I have the fee set to 0.009BTC/kB in Electrum. I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that's a good amount.

Yes this is good enough for now, but this queue size seems unusual enough to me...

[UngratefulTony]

Have any of you complainy-pants people come up with any good ideas (and remember I said "good")? No?


Well, the real achievers are actually doing the real work on the issue, and it takes time. Your idiot "duuuuuuuude" devs had their opportunity (they tried to take it way too early, lol), and spectacularly blew it.

Now, go talk to someone who's interested in stale "ideas" with zero merit, you've got some knots to undo from your delicate little panties.

Here's an idea, not mine, admittedly:

It can be phased in, like:

if (blocknumber > 115000)
    maxblocksize = largerlimit

The "real achievers" formed a company, drew in $76 million of investment from VC and legacy finance, awarded themselves stock options in said company, and now are tirelessly working to provide "solutions" for a problem they created. They make you sick and then offer to sell you the medicine for your disease.

Come July, when Blockstream/Core doesn't provide their half of the HK roundtable bargain... let's hope miners will take the initiative to plan a fork to greater capacity and leave you lot to tinker and central plan on your 1MB4EVA keccak altcoin.

[Carlton Banks]

explain to us how Core this dynamic fee market is working

exactly the way it's supposed to, those who pay the most get to the front of the queue. Which part of economics 101 did you miss? Clearly the part where scarcity forming a part of valuation eluded you altogether.


Someone needs to create an actual BlockBeyondBelief altcoin, literally "Bitcoin" "Unlimited" as it's own coin. Then you morons can go use that trash, replete with it's dismal exchange rate value.



Scarce resources are valuable per unit. Abundant resources are not. Welcome to Reality.