Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion

[bargainbin]

If you see someone moving coins between his addresses back and forth, tens/hundreds/thousands of times, is this an attempt at a legitimate transaction?

Link please.

I'd like to see how the current surge is in large part due to a massive spam attack.

Data has already been shown -


----------------------------------------------

Looks like we likely found one of the "spammers" attacking the network -
This isn't behavior that is typical from a tumbler or mixer.

https://twitter.com/DataTranslator/status/704579281507258368

1KNCgSJVHg3W5hMCyGeRA1vBiPn9Vi4qXt is been sending coins to itself since the 28th, no signs of stopping.

and another

https://twitter.com/DataTranslator/status/704612433869021184

Our Antifragile got disrupt, is kaput? O plz no!

...  Let's make bitcoin robust and prepare it to scale way beyond Visa and Mastercard combined: ...

If by "robust" you mean "so that one bored gentlemen couldn't bring the whole kit & caboodle to a grinding halt, I'm withya bro!
The road to mental health is just around the corner?

[1714747689]

1714747689

[Fatman3001]

@Bitusher that pattern alone doesn't add up to the hundreds of MB forced through the system the last couple of days. Nor the millions of BTC.

One cannot have perfect knowledge of the intentions of every user on the blockchain. With forensic analysis the most we can do is find some evidence of odd behaviors that do not fit normal use and give it a probability that it may be a spam/ddos attack on the network. Those 2 examples are of high suspect, and there likely is other examples yet to be discovered.

We're not speaking about perfect knowledge or not. Those examples are a very very very tiny part of the txs these last days. They might be a coincidence or unrelated weirdness for all we know. Whether they should be given any weight at this point seems to hinge on what one wants to be the case rather than what can reasonably be justified.

[BitUsher]

We're not speaking about perfect knowledge or not. Those examples are a very very very tiny part of the txs these last days. They might be a coincidence or unrelated weirdness for all we know. Whether they should be given any weight at this point seems to hinge on what one wants to be the case rather than what can reasonably be justified.

Considering that the blocksize is already averaging 70-80% capacity, it doesn't take much to cause a disruption. All one needs to do is spend 5-10k a day to add a persistent 1-2 tps to the network.

In one sense we should be grateful to this possible (there is no way to be sure) spammer as it is providing us with some good data and merely forcing what may or may not inevitably happen. With Segwit rolling out in April that could have potentially avoided a persistent fee market event like this but now we can study it. I have mixed feelings about this however because these types of "tests" should be done on a simulated testnet beforehand , but than again livenet data is far more valuable.

[bargainbin]

.@Fatman, Debating like this, without clearly defined premises or rules of inference, is either fun or it isn't.
Either way, it won't be productive.

You're dealing with a guy who claims to be a "developer" (whateverthefuck that means) yet defines "spam" for a Bitcoin thusly:

...actual blockchain use is low and the rest of the free space is topped off with spam. That's why fees don't rise. If every tx was legitimate...

What are the objective criteria by which any given transaction can be classified as being either: a) spam; or b) legitimate?

I have been asking this for months of many who like to kick around the term 'spam'. Many of them repeatedly. Perhaps even you? But to date, I have received exactly zero responsive replies.

Spam includes any unwanted or unnecessary transactions which impose a burden upon the network.

Unwanted and Unnecessary can be defined as tx which are deliberately made to attack the network and hold no purpose other than to cause disruption or bloat. Spam is also defined as any tx that pays far below the necessary threshold of fees that would be considered the norm during a given moment. This can change with time but is always quite distinguishable as seen here. ...

Didn't someone define pornography in loosely similar terms? "Serves no purpose but to subvert; A decent person knows it when he sees it?"

1000 sequential 10 satoshi transactions from a dice site -- not spam.
1000 sequential 10 satoshi transactions from a bad_man -- spamz.
Only hope you don't code like you post.

P.S.
>any tx that pays far below the necessary threshold of fees that would be considered the norm during a given moment

See the colors? Avoid those, because meaningless and open to interpretation. Again, if you code anything like you write...

*Until "spam" is defined (as in "necessary and sufficient," not "you'll know it when you see it"), it's pointless.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[Fatman3001]

.@Fatman, Debating like this, without clearly defined premises or rules of inference, is either fun or it isn't.
Either way, it won't be productive.

You're dealing with a guy who claims to be a "developer" (whateverthefuck that means) yet defines "spam" for a Bitcoin thusly:

...actual blockchain use is low and the rest of the free space is topped off with spam. That's why fees don't rise. If every tx was legitimate...

What are the objective criteria by which any given transaction can be classified as being either: a) spam; or b) legitimate?

I have been asking this for months of many who like to kick around the term 'spam'. Many of them repeatedly. Perhaps even you? But to date, I have received exactly zero responsive replies.

Spam includes any unwanted or unnecessary transactions which impose a burden upon the network.

Unwanted and Unnecessary can be defined as tx which are deliberately made to attack the network and hold no purpose other than to cause disruption or bloat. Spam is also defined as any tx that pays far below the necessary threshold of fees that would be considered the norm during a given moment. This can change with time but is always quite distinguishable as seen here. ...

Didn't someone define pornography in loosely similar terms? "Serves no purpose but to subvert; A decent person knows it when he sees it?"

1000 sequential 10 satoshi transactions from a dice site -- not spam.
1000 sequential 10 satoshi transactions from a bad_man -- spamz.
Only hope you don't code like you post.

P.S.
>any tx that pays far below the necessary threshold of fees that would be considered the norm during a given moment

See the colors? Avoid those, because meaningless and open to interpretation. Again, if you code anything like you write...

*Until "spam" is defined (as in "necessary and sufficient," not "you'll know it when you see it"), it's metaphysically impossible prove A, where A = spam.

I just thought he might know wtf is going on.

Everyone seems to automatically assume it's a spam attack without any proper data.

[BitUsher]

Some more examples of some of the long peeling chains occurring which have a high probability of being spam .. visually represented-



Quite beautiful actually...



Look at how they differ from other tx's visually represented in the background.

[bargainbin]

...
I just thought he might know wtf is going on.

Everyone seems to automatically assume it's a spam attack without any proper data.

His definition of "spam" is, basically, "things we I don't want to happen."
Starting with that, what is happening *is* spam. Nothing more to be said.
A more interesting (and productive) approach would be "let's define spam, describe it, completely and exclusively, in code, so that a dumb machine can know if X is spam or not. Then we wouldn't need to keep having these pointless arguments."

P.S. And here we go again: "high probability of being X, tho X is undefined, so I'll show you pictures and try to *convince* you that the data pattern is unusual." Probably works great on Reddit, but good luck turning it into code.

[BitUsher]

Everyone seems to automatically assume it's a spam attack without any proper data.

Definitions can be conceptual , relative and ambiguous and sometimes necessarily need to be regardless of how uncomfortable that makes us feel.

There necessarily cannot be an exact definition of spam and there certainly is much subjective interpretation into what constitutes as spam. Sending tx back and forth between addresses with no purpose other than disrupt normal txs would fit into that category. Identifying this behavior can be more difficult but not impossible as you can make a probabilistic assessment. Many would agree that the example above should be considered spam , while others would claim that all tx that are accepted by miners are valid and we should not ostracize or filter any types of tx's . While I empathize and understand the argument, I would posit the true cost of tx is 5-10USD now and the network is heavily subsidizing all the security costs so if someone wanted to burden the network with unnecessary tx's that merely sends btc back and forth I would consider it fine if they were taking on that cost directly instead of burdening everyone else with these costs.

[Fatman3001]

...
I just thought he might know wtf is going on.

Everyone seems to automatically assume it's a spam attack without any proper data.

His definition of "spam" is, basically, "things we I don't want to happen."
Starting with that, what is happening *is* spam. Nothing more to be said.
A more interesting (and productive) approach would be "let's define spam, describe it, completely and exclusively, in code, so that a dumb machine can know if X is spam or not. Then we wouldn't need to keep having these pointless arguments."

Whatever is happening is happening now. So if we got some proper data to explain this massive surge, and some reliable interpretations of that data, then we could have a discussion on whether its a malicious attack or mainly a surge in genuine txs. If this blows over I guess we may never know, because the Bitcoin community is too polarized atm. But if this is real, if this doesn't blow over, both sides will need to look at the data and move on from there.

[BitUsher]

Whatever is happening is happening now. So if we got some proper data to explain this massive surge, and some reliable interpretations of that data, then we could have a discussion on whether its a malicious attack or mainly a surge in genuine txs. If this blows over I guess we may never know, because the Bitcoin community is too polarized atm. But if this is real, if this doesn't blow over, both sides will need to look at the data and move on from there.

I assume you are alluding to the fact that the polarized environment is creating a perceptual bias that may taint our analysis of the data. This is a fair concern and one we should protect against. Another indication that this is indeed a spam attack rather than just an inevitable rise in txs is if it is sustained past a week. At 5-10k usd a day one would assume the attacker would eventually start losing motivation. Either way , the testing I have done thus far has been helpful in understanding some weaknesses and improvements that need to be made. Hopefully we can all learn and grow from this.

[bargainbin]

Everyone seems to automatically assume it's a spam attack without any proper data.

Definitions can be conceptual , relative and ambiguous and sometimes necessarily need to be regardless of how uncomfortable that makes us feel.

Those those are the domain of humanities students, mystics, musicians, artists, and poets. They have no place in an algorythmically-controlled currency, because
can not be turned into computer code, a rule set.

If definition is, indeed, impossible for us to arrive at [due to being impossible, or due to our own shortcomings], we can not address it in a rational, logical debate [beyond stating that it is undefined and thus lies outside the scope of logic].
In which case, we should stop what we're doing and goo play vidya.

Or the definition may be simply difficult to formalize, in which case we're lazy fucks and should get good.
The rest is sophistry & bullshit.

TL;DR: if we can not strictly define what we're talking about, we we should lrn2lute & become minstrels/lovers.

[stoat]

I politely suggest diversifying in to ETH

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[BldSwtTrs]

"We don't need an inefficient form of paypal". You have absolutely no clue what we need or not. I have no clue neither, but at least I don't a the pretense of knowledge.

Only the market knows.

And you, bunch of bolcheviks, you think you are smater than the market, and that's why you will fail and will end up working on an altcoin that nobody care about.

LoL... Its not about being smarter than the market. If the market prefers an inefficient and censorable version of paypal than so be it. That doesn't interest me, they are free to carry on with this decision and all the benefits and consequences that come with it.

Bitcoin with blocksize >1Mb is not an inefficient and censorable version of Paypal. Bitcoin with blocksize >1Mb blocksize is exactly the same as Bitcoin with <1Mb blocksize over the last 7 years. So if you don't think Bitcoin with a limit above the natural demand for blockspace is useful, then you shouldn't have been involved with Bitcoin because "blocksize limit>>>demand" is the state of Bitcoin since its inception.

On the contrary,"blocksize limit < the demand" is something entirely new, and it's something even less useful than Paypal.

Are you aware that clearinghouses and settlement networks already exist?

You want to make Bitcoin an inefficient clearinghouse. Lol.

You give to small blockists one the most incredible invention of mankind and they end up with an inefficient clearing house. That so dumb I can't even believe it's happening in the real world.

[bargainbin]

...
I just thought he might know wtf is going on.

Everyone seems to automatically assume it's a spam attack without any proper data.

His definition of "spam" is, basically, "things we I don't want to happen."
Starting with that, what is happening *is* spam. Nothing more to be said.
A more interesting (and productive) approach would be "let's define spam, describe it, completely and exclusively, in code, so that a dumb machine can know if X is spam or not. Then we wouldn't need to keep having these pointless arguments."

Whatever is happening is happening now. So if we got some proper data to explain this massive surge, and some reliable interpretations of that data, then we could have a discussion on whether its a malicious attack or mainly a surge in genuine txs. If this blows over I guess we may never know, because the Bitcoin community is too polarized atm. But if this is real, if this doesn't blow over, both sides will need to look at the data and move on from there.

I don't care about the possible motivations behind what is happening, mainly because I can not possibly hope to create a [human] psych-analyzing ruleset for Bitcoin. For me, it's sufficient that a state, a condition *is possible*. It's possible, we don't like it -- how to make it so we either like it, don't care, or make it go away? Does what_is_happening point to our system being fundamentally flawed? Can it be fixed? At what cost? What are the possible repercussions?

See what I mean, sort of?

P.S. Of course, this is all happening in real time, and girls mainstream press are watching, so the lel factor is not lost on me

[BldSwtTrs]

Blockstream: "Bitcoin could change the world but we think it's better to make a clearinghouse instead. Everything is fine with the monetary and banking system, what we really need is a fucking clearinghouse guys."

[Fatman3001]

...
I just thought he might know wtf is going on.

Everyone seems to automatically assume it's a spam attack without any proper data.

His definition of "spam" is, basically, "things we I don't want to happen."
Starting with that, what is happening *is* spam. Nothing more to be said.
A more interesting (and productive) approach would be "let's define spam, describe it, completely and exclusively, in code, so that a dumb machine can know if X is spam or not. Then we wouldn't need to keep having these pointless arguments."

Whatever is happening is happening now. So if we got some proper data to explain this massive surge, and some reliable interpretations of that data, then we could have a discussion on whether its a malicious attack or mainly a surge in genuine txs. If this blows over I guess we may never know, because the Bitcoin community is too polarized atm. But if this is real, if this doesn't blow over, both sides will need to look at the data and move on from there.

I don't care about the possible motivations behind what is happening, mainly because I can not possibly hope to create a [human] psych-analyzing ruleset for Bitcoin. For me, it's sufficient that a state, a condition *is possible*. It's possible, we don't like it -- how to make it so we either like it, don't care, or make it go away? Does what_is_happening point to our system being fundamentally flawed? Can it be fixed? At what cost? What are the possible repercussions?

See what I mean, sort of?

P.S. Of course, this is all happening in real time, and girls mainstream press are watching, so the lel factor is not lost on me

I sort of agree, but I'm not the one who needs to be convinced. Nor are you.

[tomothy]

I politely suggest diversifying in to ETH

Or DOG

Why not LTC, PPC, or NMC? Ltc especially. I'm already knee deep in losses; I already bought Peter Todd & Drak's VIA. They promised it would be revolutionary~!
Was this the plan all along? BTC breaks due to transaction backlog, forces adoption of alts. BTC co-opted by someone magical. Banks/Govt?
Seems like things are playing out exactly as they wanted?

I figure we go sideways another 3-4 months and then magically things get fixed and we have halving pump.

However, this stuff is disconcerting: 
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/48fw9u/f2pool_operator_was_pressured_into_accepting_hk/
[–]macbook-airBitcoin Miner - F2Pool 75 points 4 hours ago
In HK, Alex asked me to “respect” his time by agree the consensus asap. Also someone else told me he had bought long position just before the roundtable, if we did not agree, he would lose huge financially. If it was not these two, I would probably have escaped away that night.

This is why the conspiracy theories start to seem less theory and more just shady business as usual crap. I.e., scammers gonna scam.
I'm tempted to liquidate 75% of my remaining btc, throw it into LTC for stability/functionality and just wait, maybe buy some of this ethereum crap (seems way overbought imho, but it keeps having slight ups and downs enough to profit). Maybe a different percentage of the above. Quite discouraged by the big block vs small block fight. (Disclosure, I didn't buy Via. Well, I did, just not recently. Lost so much )
Is this what they call the despair stage?

[8up]

once the exodus starts, there is no way back...