What Mining Pools will not be upgrading to 0.8.2?

[gweedo]

Lets get this list started, I want to know who I will be supporting.

[Daily Anarchist]

Seriously, this makes me want to be a miner just so I can stay on 0.8.1

[Daily Anarchist]

This isn't a protocol change, right? This is merely a client change. If so, instead of getting into mining, maybe I'll just promise to donate some bitcoins to the next group of devs that promise to build an alternate bitcoin client.

[Daily Anarchist]

This isn't a protocol change, right? This is merely a client change. If so, instead of getting into mining, maybe I'll just promise to donate some bitcoins to the next group of devs that promise to build an alternate bitcoin client.

Yes true, but here is the tricky part, currently you can only mine with bitcoin-qt or bitcoind. So in a weird way it is a protocol change, cause all miners have to run either one of those options.

Yes, but that's ONLY because there are no competing bitcoin clients to run. But there very well could be, right?

[Ichthyo]

This isn't a protocol change, right? This is merely a client change. If so, instead of getting into mining, maybe I'll just promise to donate some bitcoins to the next group of devs that promise to build an alternate bitcoin client.

Yes true, but here is the tricky part, currently you can only mine with bitcoin-qt or bitcoind.

If you're a miner and really just put off by that new option, why don't you just set the threshold for "no fee" transactions lower when you start your mining node? According to the new logic, this will also lower the threshold for "dust" outputs, and it's user configurable now.

[bitcoiners]

I don't care who is upgrading.  If this change is made, I'm done with bitcoin.  What is trying to be accomplished is against everything bitcoin stands for.

[Daily Anarchist]

I don't care who is upgrading.  If this change is made, I'm done with bitcoin.  What is trying to be accomplished is against everything bitcoin stands for.

I, too, think the move is in the wrong direction, but it's not the end of the world.  If a lot of bitcoiners, including miners, don't like this move they can just stick with 0.8.1. My understanding is staying at 0.8.1 will NOT create a fork. So, people will still be able to send 1 satoshi, but it won't get added to the blockchain until it's picked up by a miner that runs 0.8.1, which might actually be a majority of miners if it's that unpopular.

[luv2drnkbr]

You don't need a new client.  You can just disable these things in the config file.  Jesus Christ.  This isn't some hard-coded bullying, it's actually a USEFUL addition that allows users and miners to control those variables, which was NOT previously an option.  The 53 ubc or whatever it was is set as a DEFAULT setting so "dumb" users don't have to do anything to make sure that their transactions will always be relayed by all miners regardless of circumstances.  Read the fucking pull.  Jesus.  This is a GOOD update that gives users MORE control.  You don't even understand what's happening-- you're boycotting a figment of your imagination FFS.

[gweedo]

You don't need a new client.  You can just disable these things in the config file.  Jesus Christ.  This isn't some hard-coded bullying, it's actually a USEFUL addition that allows users and miners to control those variables, which was NOT previously an option.  The 53 ubc or whatever it was is set as a DEFAULT setting so "dumb" users don't have to do anything to make sure that their transactions will always be relayed by all miners regardless of circumstances.  Read the fucking pull.  Jesus.  This is a GOOD update that gives users MORE control.  You don't even understand what's happening-- you're boycotting a figment of your imagination FFS.

You are clearly soooooo wrong, if miners don't include the transactions then how is that going to get into the blockchain. Please leave this thread, this is for people who are looking for miners that will not be upgrading.

[wumpus]

You don't need a new client.  You can just disable these things in the config file.  Jesus Christ.  This isn't some hard-coded bullying, it's actually a USEFUL addition that allows users and miners to control those variables, which was NOT previously an option.  The 53 ubc or whatever it was is set as a DEFAULT setting so "dumb" users don't have to do anything to make sure that their transactions will always be relayed by all miners regardless of circumstances.  Read the fucking pull.  Jesus.  This is a GOOD update that gives users MORE control.  You don't even understand what's happening-- you're boycotting a figment of your imagination FFS.

Yes your reply is too sane for this thread! It is for people that want to rant baselessly against a feature that is configurable in any client, with a simple command line option. Be gone Bring the pitchforks!

The question that you should be asking is: which mining pools set their min tx size lower than the default?

I'm sure some pools will accept every transaction given that the fee is good enough (Eligius?) and otherwise you could always start your own pool (you don't need to mine for that yourself), with enough people principled in the same way it shouldn't be hard to find users. It would be interesting to see "political" mining pools.

[gweedo]

You don't need a new client.  You can just disable these things in the config file.  Jesus Christ.  This isn't some hard-coded bullying, it's actually a USEFUL addition that allows users and miners to control those variables, which was NOT previously an option.  The 53 ubc or whatever it was is set as a DEFAULT setting so "dumb" users don't have to do anything to make sure that their transactions will always be relayed by all miners regardless of circumstances.  Read the fucking pull.  Jesus.  This is a GOOD update that gives users MORE control.  You don't even understand what's happening-- you're boycotting a figment of your imagination FFS.

Yes your reply is too sane for this thread! It is for people that want to rant baselessly against a feature that is configurable by any miner, with a simple command line option. Be gone

How is  it baseless? Yes it is configurable by any miner. Yet it is on by default. Which is kinda like having the opt-in, as opt-out, which is not how bitcoin should work, everything going against the white papers should be an opt-in, even if it it is censorship. As I said in many threads, there is no power I have in this. If no miners are willing to not do this, I guess the censorship will live on, and I have to deal with it. It just makes me insanely sad, that so many people are against it, yet those people's voices are not heard by the people that make the decisions. I really hope next year you guys have something that actually fixes the blockchain bloat, then lets put a patch and censor it until we figure it out. Bitcoin is a vote with your wallet kinda of software, how am I suppose to vote, if I can't even cast the ballot. I can't relay transactions that don't get include in the blockchain. That is what insanely saddens me about this whole thing, even if I want to do something it is impossible and I can't do.

[wumpus]

If no miners are willing to not do this, I guess the censorship will live on, and I have to deal with it. It just makes me insanely sad, that so many people are against it, yet those people's voices are not heard by the people that make the decisions.

Well proposed an option, you could create a "single issue" mining pool, and get people that agree with you to join.

Or you could try to help solving the underlying issue such that this kind of "censorship" is not needed in the first place. But that's very hard.

[gweedo]

If no miners are willing to not do this, I guess the censorship will live on, and I have to deal with it. It just makes me insanely sad, that so many people are against it, yet those people's voices are not heard by the people that make the decisions.

Well proposed an option, you could create a "single issue" mining pool, and get people that agree with you to join.

Or you could try to help solving the underlying issue such that this kind of "censorship" is not needed in the first place. But that's very hard.

Both those are hard, I am not a miner, and now I have to start a mining pool, in a venture I have limited number, and try and build up to a major pool this would take time and man hours. To get to a point where I can mine these types of transactions.

[Sukrim]

There are 2 issues:
1) You need to get your 1 Satoshi transaction RELAYED to a miner - this is probably the more difficult thing on your end in the future, as you might need to specifically add a few nodes that advertise themselves as relaying even tiny transactions. This could also lead to some local centralization in the network.

2) You need someone to MINE/INCLUDE your tiny transaction in the block chain - this depends on the settings miners have in their .conf file, it just defaults to 5430 Satoshis. It is actually a good thing that miners have now a better way to decide what to include. This is probably goind to be the more costly part in the future, as you might need to "bribe" some miners/pools to allow these transactions. Also I guess pools wouldn't want a lot of users to connect to their bitcoinds (or to publish their IPs), so they might cooperate with the relay nodes mentioned in 1).

You just need to enter 1 or 2 lines in your config files to have the same ruleset as the current one concerning mining and relaying transactions - it might get harder and harder to get transactions through to miners though.