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

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[adamstgBit]

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/490dyi/serious_question_if_raising_the_max_block_size/d0o35r1
...

...out of the 235,000 transactions only 90,000 are actual regular transactions. 61% of the transactions currently being mined are long chain spam transactions. So less than half of what is included in all those 1MB blocks is useless junk....

if there junk why are miners including them in blocks?

[adamstgBit]

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/490dyi/serious_question_if_raising_the_max_block_size/d0o35r1
...

...out of the 235,000 transactions only 90,000 are actual regular transactions. 61% of the transactions currently being mined are long chain spam transactions. So less than half of what is included in all those 1MB blocks is useless junk....

if there junk why are miners including them in blocks?

to get the fees

the TX themselve are probably all junk tho.

[adamstgBit]

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/490dyi/serious_question_if_raising_the_max_block_size/d0o35r1
...

...out of the 235,000 transactions only 90,000 are actual regular transactions. 61% of the transactions currently being mined are long chain spam transactions. So less than half of what is included in all those 1MB blocks is useless junk....

if there junk why are miners including them in blocks?

to get the fees

the TX themselve are probably all junk tho.

so junk TX are filling up blocks and thats why i have to pay a fee of 4cent or more.

[AlexGR]

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/490dyi/serious_question_if_raising_the_max_block_size/d0o35r1
...

...out of the 235,000 transactions only 90,000 are actual regular transactions. 61% of the transactions currently being mined are long chain spam transactions. So less than half of what is included in all those 1MB blocks is useless junk....

if there junk why are miners including them in blocks?

to get the fees

the TX themselve are probably all junk tho.

Actually, at levels like 0.2 - 0.3 btc per block, fees too are junk yes. Hence the presence of 0 tx blocks.

Personally I'm currently mining with -blockmaxsize=0. My connectivity is not that good so it'd take me a couple secs to upload a full block and then it would take some extra time to propagate, so I can't risk losing 25 btc for peanuts.

[adamstgBit]

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/490dyi/serious_question_if_raising_the_max_block_size/d0o35r1
...

...out of the 235,000 transactions only 90,000 are actual regular transactions. 61% of the transactions currently being mined are long chain spam transactions. So less than half of what is included in all those 1MB blocks is useless junk....

if there junk why are miners including them in blocks?

to get the fees

the TX themselve are probably all junk tho.

Actually, at levels like 0.2 - 0.3 btc per block, fees too are junk yes. Hence the presence of 0 tx blocks.

Personally I'm currently mining with -blockmaxsize=0. My connectivity is not that good so it'd take me a couple secs to upload a full block and then it would take some extra time to propagate, so I can't risk losing 25 btc for peanuts.

oh ic you must be F2Pool

[AliceGored]

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/490dyi/serious_question_if_raising_the_max_block_size/d0o35r1
...

...out of the 235,000 transactions only 90,000 are actual regular transactions. 61% of the transactions currently being mined are long chain spam transactions. So less than half of what is included in all those 1MB blocks is useless junk....

if there junk why are miners including them in blocks?

to get the fees

the TX themselve are probably all junk tho.

Actually, at levels like 0.2 - 0.3 btc per block, fees too are junk yes. [1] Hence the presence of 0 tx blocks.

Personally [2] I'm currently mining with -blockmaxsize=0. My connectivity is not that good so it'd take me a couple secs to upload a full block and then it would take some extra time to propagate, so I can't risk losing 25 btc for peanuts.

[1] No. Read up on tx free blocks, and why they happen within 1-55 seconds of the previous block.

[2] Just... lol.

[Mrpumperitis]

BitShares now Live on Microsoft Azure Blockchain as a Service (BaaS)
https://www.reddit.com/r/BitShares/comments/49r1t9/bitshares_now_live_on_microsoft_azure_blockchain/
wonder if this is the next coin pump after FCT...5x is in sight  , 10x is possible
if i done my maths right, FCT has pumped 180x in 3months...is that right..it cant be...is it  dec 2105 it was 5k sat going upto almost  900k sat in march

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[AlexGR]

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/490dyi/serious_question_if_raising_the_max_block_size/d0o35r1
...

...out of the 235,000 transactions only 90,000 are actual regular transactions. 61% of the transactions currently being mined are long chain spam transactions. So less than half of what is included in all those 1MB blocks is useless junk....

if there junk why are miners including them in blocks?

to get the fees

the TX themselve are probably all junk tho.

Actually, at levels like 0.2 - 0.3 btc per block, fees too are junk yes. Hence the presence of 0 tx blocks.

Personally I'm currently mining with -blockmaxsize=0. My connectivity is not that good so it'd take me a couple secs to upload a full block and then it would take some extra time to propagate, so I can't risk losing 25 btc for peanuts.

oh ic you must be F2Pool

I'm not a pool and my hashrate is tiny so there is no guarantee I'll find blocks. I'm actually conducting a quantum experiment where consciousness interacts with hashing in order to ...generate hashing collisions and do so spectacularly against the odds. So if the experiment succeeds (in a universe of infinite possibilities it has already succeeded) it would be a tragedy if I found a block and have it get orphaned because of my slow upload speed or other propagation and verification delays. Maxblock 0 it is then...

[AliceGored]

I'm not a pool and my hashrate is tiny so there is no guarantee I'll find blocks. I'm actually conducting a quantum experiment where consciousness interacts with hashing in order to ...generate hashing collisions and do so spectacularly against the odds. So if the experiment succeeds (in a universe of infinite possibilities, it has already succeeded) it would be a tragedy if I found a block and have it get orphaned because of my slow upload speed or other propagation and verification delays. Maxblock 0 it is then...

lels intensify...

[ZyclonRacerX]

... I'm actually conducting a quantum experiment where consciousness interacts with hashing in order to ...generate hashing collisions and do so spectacularly against the odds. So if the experiment succeeds (in a universe of infinite possibilities, it has already succeeded) it would be a tragedy if I found a block and have it get orphaned because of my slow upload speed or other propagation and verification delays. Maxblock 0 it is then...

Even odds you're not joking. Because Bitcoin.

[yefi]

if i done my maths right, FCT has pumped 180x in 3months...is that right..it cant be...is it  dec 2105 it was 5k sat going upto almost  900k sat in march

It was around 20k sat before the pump in Dec and peaked at ~870K sat on Polo, so about 43x.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[Mrpumperitis]

if i done my maths right, FCT has pumped 180x in 3months...is that right..it cant be...is it  dec 2105 it was 5k sat going upto almost  900k sat in march

It was around 20k sat before the pump in Dec and peaked at ~870K sat on Polo, so about 43x.

cheers m8.. on polo, pre pump ( before dec 18)for 3months it was around 5k..so how many is it from then?

[yefi]

cheers m8.. on polo, pre pump ( before dec 18)for 3months it was around 5k..so how many is it from then?

Where are you getting 5k from? It was about 100k when it launched Oct 5th on Polo then dipped as low as 16737 sat in November. It never went lower than that.

[Mrpumperitis]

cheers m8.. on polo, pre pump ( before dec 18)for 3months it was around 5k..so how many is it from then?

Where are you getting 5k from? It was about 100k when it launched Oct 5th on Polo then dipped as low as 16737 sat in November. It never went lower than that.

ahaha i missin a zero, lol ma bad..so 43x it is...still immpresive, prob best pump this yr so far, maybe BTS gonna do quarter of that at least.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation

[r0ach]

This post is for everyone that claims the fee market "breaks down" by altering block size:

I don't believe the tragedy of the commons argument is a valid one because Bitcoin never existed in "the commons" as something like a lake in the first place due to one obvious reason, it's a for-profit system managed by central bankers.  For Bitcoin to not have central bankers, it would require no maximum block size and no min transaction fee.  The problem here is, one of those variables is required to be constrained to prevent spam attacks, so you'll always have central bankers in Bitcoin.

The current devs seem obsessed with utilizing block size as the spam prevention mechanism of Bitcoin solely to try and give the appearance of Bitcoin having no central bankers, when block size is only arbitrary throughput constraint.  Minimum transaction fee is the real spam prevention tool for the job.  They just haven't utilized it because they want to pretend there's no central bankers in the system when it's obviously required.

From a miner's perspective, it's in their best interest to vote for the highest minimum transaction fee that the network will bear.  From a developer's engineering viewpoint, it's in their interest to set it to a level to prevent spam or attacks from constantly filling up blocks to create a permanent backlog.  They both have authority to do so, and both of these interests clearly point to a minimum transaction fee higher than zero, so a Bitcoin dev that isn't advocating a minimum transaction fee for each block size interval isn't fulfilling his role well IMO.

If you take these previous points as fact, there will obviously not be any marginal cost doomsday event by raising block size because the system already required central bankers to work in the first place.  Whether you agree or disagree about millions of other Larimer issues, he got it right when saying Bitcoin is a decentralized business or corporation, not a public good.  My semantics might also be wrong and you might be able to classify them as "decentralized bankers".  It's kind of unknown territory.  Regardless, there is governance and profit structure built in where it's not an unmanaged dumping ground.

there doesn't need to be a min fee set

miners can just not include transactions below a min fee of there own and just ignor TX below this min fee

also the bigger the block the higher chance of getting orphaned ( if 2 poeple fine a block at the same time the smaller one will propagate faster and win) so right there the miners NEED to keep a balance between the fees they add to the block and the size it makes that block increasing chances of getting orphaned.

nothing needs to be centrally planned...

Due to economy of scale and some miners having lower verification costs, it creates a race to the bottom of purging all but the most efficient miner (centralization).  With increasing block sizes, there would likely be some huge miner that accepts 0.00000001 fee transactions while doing so would cause others to go bankrupt.  Or the mega miner could just accept tiny or 0 fee transactions in the short term in order to bankrupt opponents.  Hence a minimum transaction fee puts a floor on how low of a race to the bottom tactic you can enact.  

Minimum transaction fee is the spam prevention mechanism of Bitcoin, not block size!  The miners are unable to create one themselves because it would require collusion and it's also an attack vector they use against each other!  That is why I say developers have to create a minimum transaction fee for each block size interval they set in order to scale Bitcoin.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin



Explanation