[1000 unconfirmed transaction] Spam attack has practically ended for 2 days!

[Carlton Banks]

Running single full nodes isn't cheap if you live in 3rd world country. Even my pc/internet connection is below minimum requirement (source))

Can anyone think of a very conspicuous poster on this forum who goes on and on about how fees are now too expensive in 3rd world countries

Frankly, one forgets the name of this particular hypocrite

[1714955621]

1714955621

[1714955621]

1714955621

[1714955621]

1714955621

[1714955621]

1714955621

[BrewMaster]

Today was great, i noticed it at first when i received a payment with a low amount of satoshi/byte and it was confirmed fast in the next block and then i checked blockchain.info and to my surprise it was showing a small number as the number of unconfirmed transactions

i wonder how long this is going to last?

[Cashew]

This shows us that there is absolutely no need for Bitcoin Unlimited or I do not know what other scaling solution that is absolutely not needed.

[7788bitcoin]

To me, this means the actual number of "real" transactions are still manageable by the 1MB blocksize. We are still far from mainstream adoption.

However, on the other hand, we also can stop people from flooding the mempool by these "stress test"...

[AngryDwarf]

It could also mean that part of the recent price drop might have been people deciding to get out of bitcoin.

[digaran]

What happens if all the nodes set their minRelayTxFee at 0.0001? or sat/b equivalent of that amount? you guys talk about spam attacks like miners are forced to include low fee transactions, they simply can ignore the low fee ones.
Any miner intentionally refuse to process transactions as fast as they can even with a relatively enough fee just to force users to include more and higher fees to earn a few hundreds bucks should know that a network being functional and reliable at all times is what people and users really expect from a network such as bitcoin's.

[pooya87]

~ they simply can ignore the low fee ones.~

low fee transactions belong to the poor users, the real users with legit transactions paying for something online for example and have their transaction stuck.

majority of the spam attack transactions have high fees (120-220 s/b)

[jonald_fyookball]

Bitcoin network will not need the extra capacity of Bitcoin Unlimited as users began migration to other coins, cheaper to transact networks, you know their names.

Yep.  Pretty sad.  And as cryptocurrency demand in general grows, new users also will look to other coins that offer plenty of bandwidth, unless Bitcoin offers
a scalability solution pretty soon.

[Yogafan00000]

It could also mean that part of the recent price drop might have been people deciding to get out of bitcoin.

Also, maybe, some folks are sitting tight on their wallets in case there is a fork.  No one wants to miss out on double coins.

[Quantus]

everyone is too busy arguing about nonsense about a possible fork in a far away future and lots of FUD in this board alone, that they even missed the fact that the memory pool has been literary empty for the past 48+ hours!

as i am writing this there are 920 unconfirmed transactions in the memory pool and the last 4 blocks are practically empty

457985    31.10
--- full
457983    892.58 KB
457982    353.94 KB
457981    316.85 KB
457980    208.78 KB
--- full
457977    0.259 KB
--- full

I know i am going to jinx it now

This proves 90%+ of the transactions in the mem-pool are spam from the major mining pools to prop up transaction fees and push a false narrative. The Truth is that we don't need to increase block size.

[Alesis]

Bitcoin network will not need the extra capacity of Bitcoin Unlimited as users began migration to other coins, cheaper to transact networks, you know their names.

Please name me a single viable alternative. By viable I mean the following:
1) Doesn't have an instamine / isn't a scam. (See Dash)
2) Isn't highly centralized / doesn't have a high king. (see Ethereum)
3) Doesn't have even worse scalability issues than Bitcoin. (see Monero)

Please indulge me.

Just goes to show how many people on Bitcointalk are actually running full nodes.

I'd say that the number is very low. A lot of people call themselves "Bitcoin enthusiasts", but they don't even have a single node running.

For all I know there are actually coins which solve most of these problems, but the problem is that pretty dodgy or weak coins tend to be the best at getting pumped and the owners best at profiteering, especially with coins like DASH which have a large instamine but can appeal to newbies who know less about that.

[dinofelis]

Bitcoin network will not need the extra capacity of Bitcoin Unlimited as users began migration to other coins, cheaper to transact networks, you know their names.

Please name me a single viable alternative. By viable I mean the following:
1) Doesn't have an instamine / isn't a scam. (See Dash)
2) Isn't highly centralized / doesn't have a high king. (see Ethereum)
3) Doesn't have even worse scalability issues than Bitcoin. (see Monero)

Monero has no block limits.  Yes, the transactions are bigger in bytes ( I think 3 or 4 times bigger), but there's no hard limit. Blocks adapt.  Only limited by network capacity and disk size, so following Moore's law.

Problem with monero is that it is not very user friendly.  But it doesn't have built-in capacity limits.

[Bit_Happy]

It could also mean that part of the recent price drop might have been people deciding to get out of bitcoin.

Also, maybe, some folks are sitting tight on their wallets in case there is a fork.  No one wants to miss out on double coins.

Count me out of that hunt:
"Double coins" == Both types worth almost nothing compared to the recent highs.

[jonald_fyookball]

It could also mean that part of the recent price drop might have been people deciding to get out of bitcoin.

Also, maybe, some folks are sitting tight on their wallets in case there is a fork.  No one wants to miss out on double coins.

Count me out of that hunt:
"Double coins" == Both types worth almost nothing compared to the recent highs.

funny thing is, both sides believe that if their coin wins, there will be a price boom.

core folks:  finally the BU debacle will be over, we can get back to bitcoin, confidence will soar, BU will become a forgotten alt
BU folks:  finally bitcoin can scale again, confidence will soar. good riddance to core/blockstream.

[Holliday]

It could also mean that part of the recent price drop might have been people deciding to get out of bitcoin.

Also, maybe, some folks are sitting tight on their wallets in case there is a fork.  No one wants to miss out on double coins.

Count me out of that hunt:
"Double coins" == Both types worth almost nothing compared to the recent highs.

funny thing is, both sides believe that if their coin wins, there will be a price boom.

core folks:  finally the BU debacle will be over, we can get back to bitcoin, confidence will soar, BU will become a forgotten alt
BU folks:  finally bitcoin can scale again, confidence will soar. good riddance to core/blockstream.

Oh I disagree. There is going to be a looooooooooooong bear market if we have a contentious hard fork. I have a feeling there will be some long term "games" played and the winner won't be known for several years. After that, recovering trust will be another long road.

If anything, this entire debacle shows how mining pools are extremely unhealthy for the network and it's unfortunate a method to promote solo mining hasn't been invented (maybe it's impossible?).

[Lauda]

Sending spam that actually takes up space in the blockchain requires that the spam pay transaction fees just like everybody else.  Perhaps the spammers just ran out of funds?  Or perhaps the fees got so expensive that the spammers decided it wasn't worth the cost anymore?

Perhaps, or perhaps they temporarily paused as they think they are "winning".

For all I know there are actually coins which solve most of these problems, but the problem is that pretty dodgy or weak coins tend to be the best at getting pumped and the owners best at profiteering, especially with coins like DASH which have a large instamine but can appeal to newbies who know less about that.

Nobody in their right mind uses DASH besides pump & dump-ing to increase their Bitcoin.

Monero has no block limits.  Yes, the transactions are bigger in bytes ( I think 3 or 4 times bigger), but there's no hard limit. Blocks adapt.  Only limited by network capacity and disk size, so following Moore's law.

Also following "Jihan's law of centralization".

funny thing is, both sides believe that if their coin wins, there will be a price boom.
-snip-

The primary reason that the price isn't much higher is the fear of a potential HF.

[jonald_fyookball]

Lauda and Holliday you just both proved my point.

[Lauda]

Lauda and Holliday you just both proved my point.

Wrong. I have mentioned neither client, neither solution nor anything. If you were deeply involved in trading, you'd know what is up. Investors don't give a single damn about rising TX fees, they care about risks, one of which is a contentious HF.

[European Central Bank]

funny thing is, both sides believe that if their coin wins, there will be a price boom.

no one will win in the case of a contentious fork. it doesn't matter if it's unlimited, UASF, a PoW change. it'll all go up in smoke.

[btbrae]

Lots of alt-coins have been cheaper and faster over the last 4 years, still are.

An old saying
"It is not about the return on your money, it is about the return of your money."

Bitcoin is more than just speed, I would advise new investors to go and read some of Satoshi's posts.

Besides, I personally am glad more bagholders are leaving Bitcoin, for every one bagholder that exits come 10 new excited, interest, entrepreneurial investors ready to take Bitcoin and business to the next stage. And one less pump and dumper.

Central bankers fight price corrections, Bitcoiners must embrace them. They clean the pipes like a good plumber.