Boycott 0.8.2

[BitcoinAshley]

Blah blah blah. Get some miners to change .conf files so they accept dust tx with fees. Problem solved. It's a free market, buddy. Someone can't handle it? 

A line in a .conf file that can be changed by ANYONE WITH A TEXT EDITOR AND HALF A BRAIN is not 'censorship' or something that 'all the anti-government people should get all worked up about.' Lol.
Relax - I'm sure there are miners that feel exactly the same way you do, and are changing their .conf files as we speak. If not, well... tough patooties.  Go cry yourself to sleep.

[kjj]

PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING IN THIS THREAD dumb people ...snip... just say the same thing over and over

I couldn't have said it better myself.  You do have a tendency to repeat yourself.

Your concern was addressed completely, correctly, and politely several times.  In several different threads, if I recall correctly.  You ignored us.  You insulted just about everyone on the forums, certainly everyone that was trying to discuss the matter with you.  You just keep repeating "censorship" and "dictator".

Sadly, you don't even seem to be a troll.  You seem to genuinely believe that Gavin has become a dictator by giving everyone easy tools for managing their node's relay policy, and that we are all censoring you by failing to relay your messages.

Your brain is defective.  Seek help.

[Buffer Overflow]

If the recent code changes are worrying people so much, allow me to remind them they are free to fork the project and undo the changes. They can then release their version and the community can vote by using it or not. Can't get much more democratic than that.

Let me know when it gets released please.

[darkmule]

What stops anyone from using 0.8.2 and setting it to accept microtransactions?  Unless it's just that the miner is too dumb to do that, the newer client is even more customizable than the last.

[darkmule]

What stops anyone from using 0.8.2 and setting it to accept microtransactions?  Unless it's just that the miner is too dumb to do that, the newer client is even more customizable than the last.

What stops people is that is by default off, so unless we all start sharing IPs with I don't think we want to, it would be very hard to relay that transaction, to a miner if any miner would pick it up. I have yet to find a miner that supports this so I can directly connect to them.

So how is a boycott effective unless it's miners doing the boycotting?  Are they joining in?

[Buffer Overflow]

I am trying to talk to them and get them to join, but their greedy eyes are wider. I am also thinking of taking $500,000 of my own money and investing in ASIC miners and doing mining myself. I am stilling thinking about that option cause $500,000 would make a tough year for me, but I am so passionate about the community I would do it.

So what happens when your miner get flooded with micro-transactions and it can't cope?

[darkmule]

I am trying to talk to them and get them to join, but their greedy eyes are wider. I am also thinking of taking $500,000 of my own money and investing in ASIC miners and doing mining myself. I am stilling thinking about that option cause $500,000 would make a tough year for me, but I am so passionate about the community I would do it.

If you do, I wish you luck.  More competition is better than less.  Just choose wisely with the field of scammers out there in the ASIC arena.

While Bitcoin may be an anarchy of sorts, it is certainly not a democracy in the traditional majoritarian sense.  I still don't see how Gavin is a dictator.  It is more like the community of miners are an oligarchy.  There's nothing forcing them going along with Gavin's ideas other than their seeming belief that it is in their interest to do so.

People generally do act in their own interest when money is concerned, and this is not necessarily a bad thing.  It seems the more configurable the Bitcoin client is, the more capable people are of doing whatever they want with it, even if that is not what Gavin wants.  Anyone doing mining is, I think, entirely capable of deviating from the default settings and, in fact, will probably have to do so just to get it to work with their systems unless they are operating with systems straight out of the box.

It just strikes me that if there is a market demand for "dust" transactions, people will figure out how to do it.  After all, once it is actually in the blockchain, it is going to continue to get confirms.  It's just that first step, which only requires ONE miner willing to include these things in mined blocks.

[Buffer Overflow]

It just strikes me that if there is a market demand for "dust" transactions, people will figure out how to do it.

I got a strong feeling people believed that one day 1 Satoshi would be worth 1 cent/penny each. Tapping away on their calculators how many millions of Satoshi's they have and how much they will be worth when that price was reached. Of course to reach that price micro-transactions would have to be the norm.
Now that the reality of the situation has emerged that Bitcoin just isn't designed for micro-transactions that dream is rapidly fading away fast.

I think this is where the demand for "dust" transactions stems from.

[solex]

It just strikes me that if there is a market demand for "dust" transactions, people will figure out how to do it.

I got a strong feeling people believed that one day 1 Satoshi would be worth 1 cent/penny each. Tapping away on their calculators how many millions of Satoshi's they have and how much they will be worth when that price was reached. Of course to reach that price micro-transactions would have to be the norm.
Now that the reality of the situation has emerged that Bitcoin just isn't designed for micro-transactions that dream is rapidly fading away fast.

I think this is where the demand for "dust" transactions stems from.

Correct.
I have asked in a similar thread for someone to detail a fiat transaction they have had for an amount less than 1 cent. Unsurprisingly there is a deafening silence.

[kjj]

Show me where I was repeating myself, cause I only repeated myself since people were asking the same questions over and over. So that isn't me repeating myself.

How was my concern addressed completely?

How is setting the default policy to block these transactions exactly making it easier?

Go read.  It is all there.  You quoted most of it in replies.  You just didn't read it.

This is the saddest thread of the forums, cause this right here, shows that if aren't on the side of the core developers then you must be the idiot. And that is what hurts me the most, and makes me sad. Freedom of speech... none is being shown in this thread. If you actually read my point of view before attacking me you would understand. I have discussed this with many bitcoiners offline and online, and this is the only thread that completely doesn't get it. That is the most upsetting thing ever. I don't know if your scared to say Gavin is a dictator or you actually believe this is the right move, but if understood my point of view you would agree with it. Or maybe not since you seem like a bitcoin foundation front runner, so yeah.

No, you are just an idiot.  It has nothing to do with who disagrees with you, it is all about you.  Just because we can all see that you are an idiot doesn't make us conspirators.  You are out in the open where we can all see you and draw our own conclusions.  You may prefer that believe that we all disagree with you because we are part of a secret cabal, but at some point you should really open yourself up to considering the alternative, that you are just plain wrong about this.

I understand your point of view completely.  I've read it in detail, and I've responded to it.  Freedom of speech does not include the ability to force other people to replicate your communication against their will.  Your co-argument, that everyone wants to relay your transactions, but Gavin has tricked them into rejecting them because they are just plain too stupid to change their config variables is insulting to pretty much everyone, and you should be ashamed of yourself for even thinking it.

The hilarious thing is that long ago, there was a free transaction relay network.  Some people didn't like fees, so they set their nodes to relay unlimited free transactions, and they set their miners to mine them.  They published a list of nodes that you could connect to that would ensure that even low priority or non-standard transactions would get to a miner that would include them eventually.  You could have taken that approach, organizing volunteers to support your cause.  But you didn't.  You chose instead to talk shit on the forums, and in doing so, I think you've driven off pretty much everyone that was once sympathetic to you.

[notme]

What stops anyone from using 0.8.2 and setting it to accept microtransactions?  Unless it's just that the miner is too dumb to do that, the newer client is even more customizable than the last.

What stops people is that is by default off, so unless we all start sharing IPs with I don't think we want to, it would be very hard to relay that transaction, to a miner if any miner would pick it up. I have yet to find a miner that supports this so I can directly connect to them.

So how is a boycott effective unless it's miners doing the boycotting?  Are they joining in?

I am trying to talk to them and get them to join, but their greedy eyes are wider. I am also thinking of taking $500,000 of my own money and investing in ASIC miners and doing mining myself. I am stilling thinking about that option cause $500,000 would make a tough year for me, but I am so passionate about the community I would do it.

I am a miner and I prefer the new fee structure.  Microtransactions are certainly still possible, but they now require fees more in line with other transactions of the same size (storage-wise).  Also, larger (transfer amount) transactions are now cheaper.  I think this is a better balance.

[jubalix]

Gavin has an ego and it needs to be under control, he is doing interviews now instead of fixing the blockchain bloat the correct way, not thru censorship of transactions. WELCOME TO BITCOIN BANKING!

even if Gav did have an ego, so what, who said that's bad? might make him a better DEV

[ralree]

If you don't like what's going on in bitcoin, just use one of the other hundred cryptocoins available.  Problem: solved.

[DeathAndTaxes]

If you don't like what's going on in bitcoin, just use one of the other hundred cryptocoins available.  Problem: solved.

It is far easier than that.  One simply needs to:

a) find one or more mining pool or major solo miner willing to lower their dust threshold.
b) enough users willing to modify their clients to relay those transactions
c) possibly some organization website to allow interested users to add key nodes to the Bitcoin node list in order to gain access to this "dust relay network".

Transactions of any size are still valid.  Miners creating blocks with transactions of any size won't be rejected by the network.  The complaints in this thread can basically be boiled down to:

"I want to spam the network with worthless uneconomical garbage.  Wait other people aren't going to help me.  CENSORSHIP. DICTATORSHIP.  RANT RANT RANT".  Creating dust spam is still possible it just now takes a little bit of work.  If everyone wanted to relay this junk it wouldn't be a problem they would modify their nodes so it would relay this junk.  The reality is the overwhelming majority sees no problem with limiting spam and a tiny minority is upset about that.  "I want to spam AND I want it to be easy.  Everyone should work to relay my spam they disagree with.  How dare they not?"

[jaywaka2713]

"I want to spam the network with worthless uneconomical garbage.  Wait other people aren't going to help me.  CENSORSHIP. DICTATORSHIP.  RANT RANT RANT".  Creating dust spam is still possible it just now takes a little bit of work.  If everyone wanted to relay this junk it wouldn't be a problem they would modify their nodes so it would relay this junk.  The reality is the overwhelming majority sees no problem with limiting spam and a tiny minority is upset about that.  "I want to spam AND I want it to be easy.  Everyone should work to relay my spam they disagree with.  How dare they not?"

You do have a valid point, but, I think you've misunderstood the bottom line of most of the discussion here. The real issue isn't behind the dust transactions. That isn't even an issue I personally care about (i've also switched back to using 0.8.2). The true issue here is that the developers are adding features that aren't getting voted on. We don't have much of a say currently about the changes that they implement.

[AliceWonder]

The true issue here is that the developers are adding features that aren't getting voted on. We don't have much of a say currently about the changes that they implement.

bitcoin-qt is a reference implementation.
You can develop and run other clients.

[jaywaka2713]

The true issue here is that the developers are adding features that aren't getting voted on. We don't have much of a say currently about the changes that they implement.

bitcoin-qt is a reference implementation.
You can develop and run other clients.

Can we develop and run clients that can host nodes as well? Or would they be considered "cancer nodes"

[grue]

Can we develop and run clients that can host nodes as well? Or would they be considered "cancer nodes"

Yes, you're free to do whatever you want with your node. But other nodes will only accept your blocks and your transactions if it agrees with their policy. Think of it this way: bitcoin is like free speech. You're free to say whatever you want, but everyone else has no obligation to listen to you.

[jaywaka2713]

Can we develop and run clients that can host nodes as well? Or would they be considered "cancer nodes"

Yes, you're free to do whatever you want with your node. But other nodes will only accept your blocks and your transactions if it agrees with their policy. Think of it this way: bitcoin is like free speech. You're free to say whatever you want, but everyone else has no obligation to listen to you.

That is the most profound statement I have seen on this entire thread so far. Thanks for the clarification.

[darkmule]

Another major issue is that these micro-transactions basically take up as much of a limited resource (space in a block) as "real" transactions.  I know I get infuriated when I am waiting for a 5 BTC transaction that is actually time-sensitive, waiting for another block, and when it comes, it's filled to the brim with bullshit .0000001 transactions and somehow, my 5 BTC transaction has missed the train despite having a transaction fee.  If the micro-transactions only consumed a commensurate amount of resources to transmit as "real" transactions, there would be less conflict.  As it is, though, often microtransactions with multiple (also tiny) inputs are actually MUCH LARGER than "real" transactions.