Bitcoin Forum
September 25, 2017, 10:55:47 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.0.1  [Torrent]. (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 [25] 26 27 28 29 »
  Print  
Author Topic: WARNING! Bitcoin will soon block small transaction outputs  (Read 56748 times)
Theraty
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 98



View Profile
May 21, 2013, 05:00:25 PM
 #481

Its a minminum we can live with I say, but what if bitcoin goes up to $1000. Does the bitcoin minimum deposit go up?
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1506380147
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1506380147

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1506380147
Reply with quote  #2

1506380147
Report to moderator
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218


Gerald Davis


View Profile
May 21, 2013, 05:11:51 PM
 #482

Its a minminum we can live with I say, but what if bitcoin goes up to $1000. Does the bitcoin minimum deposit go up?

The dust threshold is a variable, there is no minimum (or maximum) just a default.  The default value in v0.8.2 is 5430 satoshis, that default will likely be changed in future versions.  The min mandatory fee (on low priority txs) for example has been changed 4 times in the history of Bitcoin to accomodate increasing value.  

Also (even in the absence of future version) any miner can change the dust threshold by changing a single line in the config file. Right now this very second a miner could (if they chose) run 0.8.2 with a dust threshold of 1 satoshi if they felt the default of 5430s was too high.  They could also run with a dust threshold of 8196s (~$0.01 at current exchange rate) if they felt the default was too low.
boonies4u
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 826



View Profile
May 21, 2013, 06:33:45 PM
 #483

... the default value for dust is 5430 Satoshis (~0.6 US cents at current exchange rate).

5430 Satoshis is also known as a Gavin.

What do we call the next default then?
David Rabahy
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 704



View Profile
May 21, 2013, 09:22:11 PM
 #484

Remember when a Gavin was 5430; man those were the good old days.
boonies4u
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 826



View Profile
May 21, 2013, 09:23:06 PM
 #485

5430 Satoshis is also known as a Gavin.
What do we call the next default then?

The default dust threshold can always be known as the Gavin, whatever value it currently has. Honor where honor's due.

I think it is kind of misleading, since a Satoshi will always be  (and always be known as) .00000001 bitcoins.
bitcoingenerat0r
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 46



View Profile
May 23, 2013, 06:00:44 AM
 #486

Bitcoin is not suitable for micro transactions. This is all. Nothing new  here, it was pretty obvious from the very beginning that all those dusters are allowed to shit into blockchain only until there are not enough more serious transactions to fill the blocks.

If you want to spam blockchain, patch the client or use another one and hope that miners will be amenable to serve you for free.
I agree! I don't understand the querulous people. Bitcoin still suitable for micro transactions. But 54 uBTC is 0.000054 which is 0.006728 USD in the current exchange rate.

Micro transaction is 0.99 USD or 0.50 USD or 0.25 USD. Maybe 0.01-0.10 USD. But less than 0.01 USD is not micro. It is dust. Fragments.

By the way, the banks steal the cent fragments. The client only blocks them until their value increases enough.

solex
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


100 satoshis -> ISO code


View Profile
May 23, 2013, 06:14:55 AM
 #487

Bitcoin is not suitable for micro transactions. This is all. Nothing new  here, it was pretty obvious from the very beginning that all those dusters are allowed to shit into blockchain only until there are not enough more serious transactions to fill the blocks.

If you want to spam blockchain, patch the client or use another one and hope that miners will be amenable to serve you for free.
I agree! I don't understand the querulous people. Bitcoin still suitable for micro transactions. But 54 uBTC is 0.000054 which is 0.006728 USD in the current exchange rate.

Micro transaction is 0.99 USD or 0.50 USD or 0.25 USD. Maybe 0.01-0.10 USD. But less than 0.01 USD is not micro. It is dust. Fragments.

By the way, the banks steal the cent fragments. The client only blocks them until their value increases enough.

Yes. And...

Exactly! Can anyone detail any previous fiat transaction they had for an amount < 1 cent?

silence on this, so far.

marcus_of_augustus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2380



View Profile
May 23, 2013, 07:40:53 AM
 #488

Umm, apparently there were some guys from india at the conference that said they needed transactions in the rupees range.

I don't know what a cup of coffee costs in Bangalore but I can't imagine it is that much once the conversion is done ...

http://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/city_result.jsp?country=India&city=Bangalore

Smallest atomic unit here seems to 0.33L bottle of water at 15 rupees (about 0.0022 btc) ... although there is 1 min. of Prepaid Mobile Tariff Local (No Discounts or Plans) for 1 Rps. (about 0.00015 btc)

solex
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


100 satoshis -> ISO code


View Profile
May 23, 2013, 08:01:31 AM
 #489

Umm, apparently there were some guys from india at the conference that said they needed transactions in the rupees range.

I don't know what a cup of coffee costs in Bangalore but I can't imagine it is that much once the conversion is done ...

http://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/city_result.jsp?country=India&city=Bangalore

Smallest atomic unit here seems to 0.33L bottle of water at 15 rupees (about 0.0022 btc) ... although there is 1 min. of Prepaid Mobile Tariff Local (No Discounts or Plans) for 1 Rps. (about 0.00015 btc)

LOL. But even those are larger than the 0.000054

Used to be able to get candy for 1 cent, occasionally 3 for a cent, in the days before the inflation megatrend.



AliceWonder
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 168



View Profile
June 19, 2013, 08:36:01 AM
 #490

I don't mean to make any enemies but if this is what people are getting upset over then bitcoin has made it.

I still haven't bought any, but I've played at some faucet sites just to get some practice currency, you know, make sure I can wipe my client data and restore.

Even they payed me more than the cutoff limit, and not by a small amount.

I don't think this is a big deal and bitcoin-qt isn't the only client in town. Use another if you don't like it.

QuarkCoin - what I believe bitcoin was intended to be. On reddit: http://www.reddit.com/r/QuarkCoin/
bg002h
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358


I outlived my lifetime membership:)


View Profile WWW
June 19, 2013, 11:47:02 AM
 #491

Does the push for eliminating dust raise the desire for off-chain transactions? I should think this would jumpstart off chain efforts.

Hardfork aren't that hard.
1GCDzqmX2Cf513E8NeThNHxiYEivU1Chhe
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218


Gerald Davis


View Profile
June 19, 2013, 03:28:25 PM
 #492

Does the push for eliminating dust raise the desire for off-chain transactions? I should think this would jumpstart off chain efforts.

Is there a huge "real" (i.e. non trolling) demand to pay people tiny fractions of a penny either on or off blockchain?  I would guess not and thus it won't jumpstart anything.
wolongong
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 67



View Profile
June 19, 2013, 05:32:41 PM
 #493

All the faucet sites have to implement off chain money boxes now
nimda
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 784


0xFB0D8D1534241423


View Profile
June 19, 2013, 05:47:06 PM
 #494

All the faucet sites have to implement off chain money boxes now

Good. They were just inflating the blockchain anyhow.

I recommend asking me for a signature from my GPG key before doing a trade. I will NEVER deny such a request.
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218


Gerald Davis


View Profile
June 19, 2013, 05:50:46 PM
 #495

All the faucet sites have to implement off chain money boxes now

Or just .... I don't know dispense 0.06 mBTC or more at once (I know an utterly staggering sum of roughly half a penny).
wolongong
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 67



View Profile
June 19, 2013, 07:37:03 PM
 #496

That, or resort to a "spinoff" like http://www.coinbox.me/ ..
firefop
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


View Profile
June 24, 2013, 03:46:08 PM
 #497

Bitcoin is not suitable for micro transactions. This is all. Nothing new  here, it was pretty obvious from the very beginning that all those dusters are allowed to shit into blockchain only until there are not enough more serious transactions to fill the blocks.

If you want to spam blockchain, patch the client or use another one and hope that miners will be amenable to serve you for free.
I agree! I don't understand the querulous people. Bitcoin still suitable for micro transactions. But 54 uBTC is 0.000054 which is 0.006728 USD in the current exchange rate.

Micro transaction is 0.99 USD or 0.50 USD or 0.25 USD. Maybe 0.01-0.10 USD. But less than 0.01 USD is not micro. It is dust. Fragments.

By the way, the banks steal the cent fragments. The client only blocks them until their value increases enough.

This entire idea of limiting the size of transaction is a non-solution solution. Pure developer laziness imo. What really needs to be developed is a technical solution to the ever increasing block-chain-size. Some sort of native client support for truncating it in some way (while still having the option to get/keep the entire thing). Then the 'dust' as we're calling it can fall where it may according to free-market principles.

I will not be supporting this change and encouraging the bitcoin users I know to do the same.



Inaba
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260



View Profile WWW
June 24, 2013, 03:51:29 PM
 #498

Yeah, this change is causing problems for me as well on EMC.  I definitely do not support it at this point.

I agree with Firefop.  A solution needs to be found that addresses the problem, not covers it up and ignores it.  At some point, even large transactions are going to bloat the block chain if bitcoin becomes popular enough... so it's a problem regardless of transaction size.

Even sendmany is rejecting payments less than the specified amount, when there are many, many other, larger values - that makes absolutely no sense.

If you're searching these lines for a point, you've probably missed it.  There was never anything there in the first place.
jgarzik
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1470


View Profile
June 24, 2013, 05:53:49 PM
 #499

This entire idea of limiting the size of transaction is a non-solution solution. Pure developer laziness imo. What really needs to be developed is a technical solution to the ever increasing block-chain-size. Some sort of native client support for truncating it in some way (while still having the option to get/keep the entire thing). Then the 'dust' as we're calling it can fall where it may according to free-market principles.

A "solution" of this type would simply not be bitcoin.  An ever increasing blockchain is an integral part of the system that you bought into.  Any other solution is no longer the zero-trust system Satoshi invented and that we all bought into.

Further, you cannot handwave away the problem that, if transactions is infinitesimally cheap, people will abuse the system by sending non-currency data messages. Lots of them. Gigabytes worth, as other alt-chain field experience has proven. To the point that bitcoin-the-currency transactions are impacted.

"I want a system that can process infinite amounts of traffic" is in the land of unicorns.

The accusation of dev laziness is particularly rich, given that SatoshiDICE abused the blockchain in this way, by sending informational messages (IM "You lost a bet") via the blockchain.

If you want an infinite amount of transactions per 10 minutes, you have just reinvented the Internet... over the blockchain. Poorly.

All that said, block chain size has an easy solution for the individual user -- use an SPV wallet.  And for the medium term, there are plans for distinguishing between archive nodes (those that store the full chain) and validating nodes (pruned).



Jeff Garzik, bitcoin core dev team and BitPay engineer; opinions are my own, not my employer.
Donations / tip jar: 1BrufViLKnSWtuWGkryPsKsxonV2NQ7Tcj
gweedo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246


Java, PHP, HTML/CSS Programmer for Hire!


View Profile WWW
June 24, 2013, 06:00:45 PM
 #500

The accusation of dev laziness is particularly rich, given that SatoshiDICE abused the blockchain in this way, by sending informational messages (IM "You lost a bet") via the blockchain.

I guess I missed that part in the whitepapers, where you can only use the blockchain for transfers of wealth. This Insanely upsetting, just shows you guys are a bunch of greedy people and don't have the best interest for bitcoiners. So Sad.

Thank god, for bitcoinj to soon have full verification I can't wait to get away from this horrible team, that would make Satoshi weep.


Edit: How Erik went and became a member of the foundation, is also insane. I feel so bad for him cause you just slander him and his company. Is that a joke in the foundation? That you got his money yet call him an enemy of bitcoin blockchain for abuse.

Want to earn 2500 SATOSHIS per hour? Come Chat and Chill in https://goseemybits.com/lobby
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 [25] 26 27 28 29 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!