Someone is spamming the blockchain

[CIYAM]

So in summary (perhaps) if you have 300 BTC you can "spam the blockchain" with such small tx's no worries.

I guess that as not so many people have 300 BTC to do so (or to risk on a bot that may malfunction) then this is not really a pressing issue (just an interesting observation thanks to the OP having noticed it).

[1715541025]

1715541025

[1715541025]

1715541025

[1715541025]

1715541025

[nottm28]

If they want to do it every 3 blocks, they might want to make sure the transactions won't have trouble getting through in case 3 blocks are mined rather quickly after each other.  Or, they just had 300 BTC handy that they didn't want to split up.  Or.... ??

If I sat there using online banking to transfer money from one account to another over and over - my bank would put a hold on my account. I think there should be a way to prevent this. This one person is unlikely to have any effect but if the bot-net dickheads get hold of it...

[meekstav876]

https://blockchain.info/address/15Z4XmorKSN51ndyPrZ2EtL7Nnksb88888

300BTC sending back and forth...  

If hes paying fee's theres nothing wrong with it.

[SgtSpike]

If they want to do it every 3 blocks, they might want to make sure the transactions won't have trouble getting through in case 3 blocks are mined rather quickly after each other.  Or, they just had 300 BTC handy that they didn't want to split up.  Or.... ??

If I sat there using online banking to transfer money from one account to another over and over - my bank would put a hold on my account. I think there should be a way to prevent this. This one person is unlikely to have any effect but if the bot-net dickheads get hold of it...

There is no way to prevent it besides changing the fee structure.  300 BTC is enough that it could be sent in every block without a fee.

[CIYAM]

If hes paying fee's theres nothing wrong with it.

He is not paying fees - otherwise the topic would not even be here.

[2112]

Dear Ian (and TradeFortress)!

Please do us all a favor and stop responding to the spammy one-liners from the accounts that post only to be able to send further spam in private messages.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=253190.0

If you see an one-liner just click on the user name and check the last posts of the user before you reply.

Thanks in advance.

If everyone did this then the blockchain would end up 1000s of times bigger than it is - and how is it totally normal to send your BTC to one address and back to the original address every single block?

He is not paying fees - otherwise the topic would not even be here.

[Bacon9504A]

Not spamming!

[Bro]

Perhaps someone plans to offer a BTC investment vehicle to potential non-technical investors and wants to provide them other "good data" beyond just exchange pricing. That entity could simply point to the sheer number of bitcoins transferred through the network as an "indicator" of its increased usage, knowing the average person wouldn't investigate the blockchain itself for something like this.

could be that or just someone holding lots of BTCs trying to make transaction statistics look good

or someone calibrating his script or measuring something in the network (confirmation time vs time)?

[CIYAM]

If you see an one-liner just click on the user name and check the last posts of the user before you reply.

You instructions are duly noted and kindly don't refer to me as "dear" in the future (I am not now nor ever will be "your dear" ).

[WiW]

They're just f***ing with you for the lulz. They're attention whores from 4chan and y'all just eating up the bait.

[ArpFlush]

when you click on the icon next to "one chinese sb which love 8", you get an error message:

ERROR: Address ledger is extremely large. Contact me if you really need the data.

[buysellbitcoin]

when you click on the icon next to "one chinese sb which love 8", you get an error message:

ERROR: Address ledger is extremely large. Contact me if you really need the data.

That is theymos for you

Cheers

[buysellbitcoin]

when you click on the icon next to "one chinese sb which love 8", you get an error message:

ERROR: Address ledger is extremely large. Contact me if you really need the data.

That is theymos for you

Cheers

lol, and when I looked up for sb I got below :

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=SB

SB. noun. (pl. same) also,S13 Comes from a Chinese words. Pronounces Sha bi,means "Stupid Bitch".

Cheers

[nottm28]

I googled his payment address and found these:

https://plus.google.com/communities/111634010372327591643/stream/350db628-910e-45ca-83e3-c01a7f31bdb8

Looks like his name is Kevin Yuan (on google+)

and he likes satoshi dice...

http://www.satoshidice.com/full.php?tx=1a11bfc12b103254b582c13d0bd4527dde82908d8e2561b6d6573e9141925db6

http://www.coin500.com/report/active.html


[EDIT] googled for this 15Z4XmorKSN51ndyPrZ2EtL7Nnksb88888

[CIYAM]

SB. noun. (pl. same) also,S13 Comes from a Chinese words. Pronounces Sha bi,means "Stupid Bitch".

Actually "bi" is the term for female genitalia so that is perhaps a more polite translation of the actual meaning (but yes - not to be used in front of strangers if you are in China).

I can see the attraction of using "stupid bitch" though (as it makes more sense to a westerner being SB and is probably the more equivalent expression used in the west).

[SRoulette]

we were going to run into this problem sooner or later, script allows for data to be stored in the blockchain, however since there is currently no incentive to hold the blockchain (fees being paid to hold it), eventually we'll run into serious storage problems enhanced by using the blockchain for storage, my companies design is looking at that seriously and we're currently trying to figure out a method that will keep bloat down to a minimum while maintaining a DDOS proof account ledger.

short answer is no 0 btc fees, which I would happily support.

[2112]

You instructions are duly noted and kindly don't refer to me as "dear" in the future (I am not now nor ever will be "your dear" ).

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to offend you in any way. I just wanted to distinguish my post from the other as being a meta-post that is off-topic literally but on-topic morally.

I addressed you because I know you are a native English speaker living in a country where few people speak English. You probably set your linguistic threshold really low before you consider some statement sincere and intelligent.

I'm in an opposite situation and additionally in the past I had an experience of having to instruct first-line sales- and tech-support people in the art of recognizing time-wasters that try to finagle a freebie. Thus my linguistic threshold is diametraly opposite.

We can only guess what is the motivation of somebody moving Bitcoins to and fro.

On the other hand on this forum there's no need to guess, just read the Meta subforum. The moderators and administrators are slowly loosing control of this forum to the slow-spammers that make incisive posts, one-liners or otherwise. That the 3 accounts that posted spam in this thread were not deleted is the proof.

I understand trying to be helpful to newbies, but please administer a passive Turing test on one or two pages of the past posts of an unknown user before posing a reply. It will make our forum more friendly to the regular users and deter the spammers.

[CIYAM]

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to offend you in any way. I just wanted to distinguish my post from the other as being a meta-post that is off-topic literally but on-topic morally.

Your post was more than a touch patronising (to any native English speaker I think) and if you *care to read my post history* then you'll see I have rarely wasted my time posting replies to spammers (and I have never posted for the sake of posting even before the new rating system was introduced).

I did acknowledge to TradeFortress my mistake with the one particular post (I tend to assume that most posts are legit but of course every now and then I can make a mistake as we all do from time to time I would think) - so I think you can just *trust* me to do the right thing rather than give me a lecture thanks all the same.

Also whether I reply or not to a "spam" post for the sake of sending PMs doesn't stop the person from sending PMs (and if their post is reported and removed then they will not be able to send PMs regardless of their post being quoted so I am in no way helping them).

Of course this post is totally OT - so perhaps we could get back to discussing the OP or maybe this topic has run its course (I think I am about ready for the "unwatch" click).

[WiW]

Zero fee trasactions should be banned. Under all scenarios possible, sending 300 BTC should cost more in transaction fees than sending less BTC.
In real world, we already have fucked-up monetary system that favours rich over poor, do we want the same or similar system online as well? No.

Right, so who gets to decide this? YOU? Why don't you just let the people processing the transactions deal with this, okay?

Or better yet, go mine and decide for yourself which transactions get into blocks and which don't.

Stop bitching.

[SgtSpike]

we were going to run into this problem sooner or later, script allows for data to be stored in the blockchain, however since there is currently no incentive to hold the blockchain (fees being paid to hold it), eventually we'll run into serious storage problems enhanced by using the blockchain for storage, my companies design is looking at that seriously and we're currently trying to figure out a method that will keep bloat down to a minimum while maintaining a DDOS proof account ledger.

short answer is no 0 btc fees, which I would happily support.

+1

Zero fee trasactions should be banned. Under all scenarios possible, sending 300 BTC should cost more in transaction fees than sending less BTC.
In real world, we already have fucked-up monetary system that favours rich over poor, do we want the same or similar system online as well? No.

The purpose of fees is to limit spam, not to create an advantage/disadvantage of the rich vs poor.  If you want to "even it out", then simply require a fee that grow linearly with how much room the transaction takes.  Say, 1 satoshi for every byte of room on the blockchain, or something.