WARNING! Bitcoin will soon block small transaction outputs

[Daily Anarchist]

Thank you for clarifying that. While I still strongly dislike the move,

I think when you have more time to absorb what is actually being changed you might change your mind. The bottom line is that every user will be able to set their own dust limit. The current version has hardcoded limits that can not be changed without a source patch and recompile. The new version will have limits that can be changed with a setting in bitcoin.conf.

That is for miners only not the users. So yeah guess you didn't read.

This whole episode has definitely inspired me to be a miner, and a solo miner at that.

[1713247022]

1713247022

[1713247022]

1713247022

[1713247022]

1713247022

[1713247022]

1713247022

[gmaxwell]

That is for miners only not the users. So yeah guess you didn't read.

It changes the behavior all around, but if you create transactions miners won't mine you won't be too happy— same story as today (try making some transactions that pay a value of 0 to one of their outputs, or which have 5 keys in a multisig, or use OP_SHA256, etc).

[justusranvier]

That is for miners only not the users. So yeah guess you didn't read.

I am basing that off the description in the pull request:

So this patch lets users and miners specify the minimum transaction fees at startup, using the -mintxfee / -mintxrelayfee options (which I'm intentionally leaving undocumented for now). The dust/nonstandard test is based on the -mintxrelayfee.

If this is inaccurate, then please cite specific lines of code to back up your claim.

[marcus_of_augustus]

I think I might set my dust limit way high like

Code:

minrelaytxfee=0.01

I'm sick of carrying around a whole lot of everybody else's crap. When you exist on dial-up connection and old hardware you might appreciate what the cost of TX actually are. Maybe a lot of the people spouting off about this are actually spoiled brats with high-end rigs and fibre-optic connections living on free electricity? 

[Daily Anarchist]

That is for miners only not the users. So yeah guess you didn't read.

It changes the behavior all around, but if you create transactions miners won't mine you won't be too happy.

It creates changes that SOME miners won't mine, right? Nothing wrong with that. Hell, a miner could right now charge 1 BTC fee per transaction if he wants. It just means no transactions will go through on the blocks he mines. I'm okay with that.

[edmundedgar]

I fully understand all of the issues involved and from my own point of view Gavin, Jeff, and Greg are doing an amazing job dealing with the unwashed masses of the Bitcoin public regarding these and other issues. Everything so far has been sensible and they deserve a ton of praise for treating the protocol and the software with utmost respect, professionalism, and rigor.

Agreed. And this is politically important software, used by people who are very passionate about it. If nobody's calling them fucking nazis, they're doing something wrong.

That said, I do wonder if the communication could have got out in front of this - sticky thread on the forum on what's planned, explaining the situation before and after, something. We seem to end up with communications to people who can't follow what's on Github being led by people who misunderstood something and got upset about it, or people with an agenda. Then the devs end up having to wade through loads of forum threads trying to put out the resulting outrage fires.

[gmaxwell]

I think I might set my dust limit way high like

I'd generally discourage that— right now the p2p protocol has no feed back to tell people that their transaction wasn't relayed. Thats part of the reason that the knobs aren't blinkenlights advertised features in this version— setting them sanely and in a way that doesn't have collateral damage risk requires a pretty good grasp of the whole thing.

It creates changes that SOME miners won't mine, right? Nothing wrong with that. Hell, a miner could right now charge 1 BTC fee per transaction if he wants. It just means no transactions will go through on the blocks he mines. I'm okay with that.

Right, assuming that some agree that creating more very small outputs is in their and Bitcoin's interest. I'm sure for particular applications where it makes sense it won't be too hard to get things mined— as has been the case,  e.g. Eligius has mined non-standard transactions on demand, just by grabbing luke and convincing him that it's not an attack on Bitcoin.

[pekv2]

[bitcoiners]

BOO YAH!  This is were we are heading.

[justusranvier]

If this is inaccurate, then please cite specific lines of code to back up your claim.

Your not in the right pull request

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/2577

Not only is that false, but also it's not a specific line of code that backs up your claim.

[gweedo]

Dear noobs, relax, turned out you are not only ones who have no clue. In fact it seems you have inspired Bitcoin Magazine to regurgitate and publish ( http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1drnvp/bitcoin_developers_adding_0007_minimum/ )  whatever nonsense you are saying here. Congratulations!

Call it non-sense I call it censoring it is great that a good media outlet has reported this correctly Thank you Bitcoin magazine, lets SAVE BITCOIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[bitcoiners]

Dear noobs, relax, turned out you are not only ones who have no clue. In fact it seems you have inspired Bitcoin Magazine to regurgitate and publish ( http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1drnvp/bitcoin_developers_adding_0007_minimum/ )  whatever nonsense you are saying here. Congratulations!

The btc establishment backs this and speaks loud and clear... The 1% speaks in every monetary system and the 1% are saying, "if you are too fucking poor don't weight us fucking down... Fuck off!"

Imagine that.

[pekv2]

Dear noobs, relax, turned out you are not only ones who have no clue. In fact it seems you have inspired Bitcoin Magazine to regurgitate and publish ( http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1drnvp/bitcoin_developers_adding_0007_minimum/ )  whatever nonsense you are saying here. Congratulations!

Happy redditing.

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1drs61/bitcoincensored/

[boonies4u]

That is for miners only not the users. So yeah guess you didn't read.

It changes the behavior all around, but if you create transactions miners won't mine you won't be too happy.

It creates changes that SOME miners won't mine, right? Nothing wrong with that. Hell, a miner could right now charge 1 BTC fee per transaction if he wants. It just means no transactions will go through on the blocks he mines. I'm okay with that.

You're okay with miners being rewarded for not confirming any transactions?

[marcus_of_augustus]

I think I might set my dust limit way high like

Code:

minrelaytxfee=0.01

I'm sick of carrying around a whole lot of everybody else's crap. When you exist on dial-up connection and old hardware you might appreciate what the cost of TX actually are. Maybe a lot of the people spouting off about this are actually spoiled brats with high-end rigs and fibre-optic connections living on free electricity?  

Then you shouldn't even be using a full node, go use a lightweight node, otherwise I see no reason to complain.

What?! Are you trying to censor me off the blockchain just because I have dial-up and old hardware? [sarc]Facist nazi rich prick![/sarc]

[bitcoiners]

Dear noobs, relax, turned out you are not only ones who have no clue. In fact it seems you have inspired Bitcoin Magazine to regurgitate and publish ( http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1drnvp/bitcoin_developers_adding_0007_minimum/ )  whatever nonsense you are saying here. Congratulations!

LOL!

Top comment on reddit.

And now Bitcoin Magazine has proved to be just as completely clueless about Bitcoin as a bunch of noobs on the forums and reddit.
.

You are only damaging your own rep Vlad.  Who cares what we on the forums say? lol what an idiot.

[mc_lovin]

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

Tracking pixel?

[mc_lovin]

Tracking pixel?

lol I copied it to imgur and didn't realize I only grabbed the pixel

[JamesTaylor]

So link to this Gaving "IThinkImUSAPresident" Andresen guy comment.
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/2577#issuecomment-17141937

Bitcoin is not appropriate for transactions less than a penny or three.

´
That's what he says, that's his opinion, why should everyone do what he says? CENSORSHIP. DICTATORSHIP. END THIS NOW.

They are creating a bitcoin fork: FREECOIN VS BANKCOIN.