No block solved in the last 3 hours?

[darkwon]

Is this really true? Blockexplorer and my own client are at least telling me this..

I'm getting a bit nervous, has this happened before?

[1713507427]

1713507427

[1713507427]

1713507427

[1713507427]

1713507427

[1713507427]

1713507427

[error]

I see the latest block is 136778, and it means nothing.

[darkwon]

Yea i see that too and that block was 3 hours ago, right? I mean is this normal behavior, because there should be 6 blocks per hour normally if i'm correct, and this would be a major statistical unlikeliness, something like 0,00001% chance for this to happen.

[opticbit]

with the high difficulty levels, I think its more likely to see high variations in time it take to find a block.

Is there a reason why the difficulty is not set to start dropping if a block is not found for 20min or an hr?  The method of increasing difficulty makes sense,  and if all blocks take 20 min it will take a while to drop the difficulty but will happen.  However if it starts taking days to find a block we could be waiting for the next genration of gpu, or quantum computer (dWave is not powerful enough from what i've heard).

[error]

Look, a new block!

[darkwon]

Ok now my client shows block 779 to be solved, but it doesn't show up in blockexplorer and my transaction is still unconfirmed?

[error]

Ok now my client shows block 779 to be solved, but it doesn't show up in blockexplorer and my transaction is still unconfirmed?

Oh, NOW you tell us. Why didn't you say so before?

Looks like blockexplorer is down, or having some issues.

[darkwon]

Well, seems like blocks are solved again and showing up in blockexplorer (779 was big, over 260k BTC transferred). But still my transaction was not confirmed in 779, 780 and 781, is this something to worry about or will it be confirmed in future blocks?

[natman3400]

Well, seems like blocks are solved again and showing up in blockexplorer (779 was big, over 260k BTC transferred). But still my transaction was not confirmed in 779, 780 and 781, is this something to worry about or will it be confirmed in future blocks?

This can happen sometimes, it just means who ever found those blocks decided not to include those transactions, it will most likely be in the next few blocks.

[error]

Well, seems like blocks are solved again and showing up in blockexplorer (779 was big, over 260k BTC transferred). But still my transaction was not confirmed in 779, 780 and 781, is this something to worry about or will it be confirmed in future blocks?

So you still see 0/unconfirmed in the bitcoin client?

[dooglus]

Yea i see that too and that block was 3 hours ago, right? I mean is this normal behavior, because there should be 6 blocks per hour normally if i'm correct, and this would be a major statistical unlikeliness, something like 0,00001% chance for this to happen.

The gap between blocks was around 59 minutes.  Not sure where you're getting 3 hours from.

[TeraPool]

Yea i see that too and that block was 3 hours ago, right? I mean is this normal behavior, because there should be 6 blocks per hour normally if i'm correct, and this would be a major statistical unlikeliness, something like 0,00001% chance for this to happen.

The gap between blocks was around 59 minutes.  Not sure where you're getting 3 hours from.

That's still quite a gap.

[borgfish]

did you see that ?

13.07 15:25:36   0h 00m     0    1390     None
13.07 15:25:33   0h 03m     24    228594     0.00509200

3 seconds for a block at deepbit.

there should be more 1h gaps ...

[myhoho]

 Something is happening... I can't see some transactions sent to me which I can find in blockexplorer. Deepbit is cheating? Mass panic, panic sell  ?

[jackjack]

darkwon, is your transaction still 0/unconfirmed?

[Raoul Duke]

This can happen sometimes, it just means who ever found those blocks decided not to include those transactions, it will most likely be in the next few blocks.

I keep reading this over and over...

Now, million bitcoin question: How the hell do they decide which transactions to include?

Or does this question need another thread?

[notme]

This can happen sometimes, it just means who ever found those blocks decided not to include those transactions, it will most likely be in the next few blocks.

I keep reading this over and over...

Now, million bitcoin question: How the hell do they decide which transactions to include?

Or does this question need another thread?

Priority is calculated from the size of the transaction (in kb) and the length of time the sending account has been idle.  This is necessary to prevent transaction spam.  If your transaction is low priority, the client should suggest a fee Be included.

[Raoul Duke]

This can happen sometimes, it just means who ever found those blocks decided not to include those transactions, it will most likely be in the next few blocks.

I keep reading this over and over...

Now, million bitcoin question: How the hell do they decide which transactions to include?

Or does this question need another thread?

Priority is calculated from the size of the transaction (in kb) and the length of time the sending account has been idle.  This is necessary to prevent transaction spam.  If your transaction is low priority, the client should suggest a fee Be included.

If it's an algorithm that calculates the transaction priority and decides if it's included in the block or not, people should stop saying that whoever finds the block is the one to decide to include transactions(or not).
If it's like you say, miners don't decide s***. The software does, without any input from them.

[kjj]

This can happen sometimes, it just means who ever found those blocks decided not to include those transactions, it will most likely be in the next few blocks.

I keep reading this over and over...

Now, million bitcoin question: How the hell do they decide which transactions to include?

Or does this question need another thread?

Priority is calculated from the size of the transaction (in kb) and the length of time the sending account has been idle.  This is necessary to prevent transaction spam.  If your transaction is low priority, the client should suggest a fee Be included.

If it's an algorithm that calculates the transaction priority and decides if it's included in the block or not, people should stop saying that whoever finds the block is the one to decide to include transactions(or not).
If it's like you say, miners don't decide s***. The software does, without any input from them.

The big pools actually do customize their rules.  BTC Guild never pays fees on their own payouts, for example, because their node software will always accept them, even if other pools do not.  And I think that slush will automatically accept any and all transactions without regard to fees paid, but don't quote me on that.