Mempool full? Long transaction times + fees x10!

[franky1]

No one is talking about censoring transactions, the talk is about making non-transactions (aka. spam) more difficult/expensive.

The protocol doesn't agree with your definition of transaction.

the protocol has been softened.
the protocol has been weakened to allow crap data.

blackhatcoiner you sound more like doomad every day

if you enjoy that the protocol now allows crap data then you are not interested in the security of bitcoin and instead you are more interested in breaking bitcoin

the protocol 2009-2021 never allowed 1 tx to take upto 4mb of crap data bloat

if you like this new protocol change that is less than one year old. then you are very shameful and need to think about what matters most. you sucking up to personalities that want to break bitcoin. or .. start for once to care about bitcoin

because right now you dont seem to care about bitcoin

[BlackHatCoiner]

the protocol 2009-2021 never allowed 1 tx to take upto 4mb of crap data bloat

But there have never been any hard forks since then. Only soft forks. This means that only previously valid rules are made invalid. If it was invalid to do the same in 2009, and there have never been any hard forks, how come it be valid now? Also, there were a few transactions like - 54e48e5f5c656b26c3bca14a8c95aa583d07ebe84dde3b7dd4a78f4e4186e713 - in 2013 which did make usage of the blockchain as storage.

[DaveF]

...
pools dont care. to them only having to collate 1 transactions with 1 sigop is quick computation for collating data. thus they can push out blocktemplate hashs faster. thus win rewards sooner then competition
...

Except now they are pushing out a larger block that takes longer to propagate then an empty block. Sooner or later that is going to backfire on them when their large full block looses to an empty block. Probably not today or tomorrow or next week or next month, but sooner or later a pool that does not accept spam is going to put out a block that is empty since the mempool is just filled with spam at that moment. And someone is going to see it and solve the next block on top of it instead of the spam filled one.

The problem with a pool taking the 0 fee is that it's short term thinking.
OR as others have suggested they got BTC on the back end that they may or may not have shared with their miners.

Kind of like the VIAPool TX accelerator. They keep the money paid for that, the miners just get the lower fee that was in the TX itself.

-Dave

[franky1]

the protocol 2009-2021 never allowed 1 tx to take upto 4mb of crap data bloat

But there have never been any hard forks since then. Only soft forks. This means that only previously valid rules are made invalid. If it was invalid to do the same in 2009, and there have never been any hard forks, how come it be valid now? Also, there were a few transactions like - 54e48e5f5c656b26c3bca14a8c95aa583d07ebe84dde3b7dd4a78f4e4186e713 - in 2013 which did make usage of the blockchain as storage.

1. the protocol got SOFTENED to allow crap in.. this process of softening started mainly in mid 2017 and again in 2022

2. the 2013 tx you used is not where 1 tx has 1 signature area of crap.
nor where one input or output could spam hundreds of kb
 its instead a tx of hundreds of outputs
where each output had a byte limit.. (unlike now)

do you even read or do research? do you even know bitcoin history. or are you just pushing out propaganda to say bitcoin should continue to be softened until there are no good rules left and then promote your favoured subnetwork

you really are shameful in your methods.

[Artemis3]

No one is talking about censoring transactions, the talk is about making non-transactions (aka. spam) more difficult/expensive.

The protocol doesn't agree with your definition of transaction.

That's the loophole that needs to be closed.

[NotATether]

Vbytes is a more recent estimation that still counts in bytes, but does not count the bytes of certain parts of the transaction such as the witness data (IIRC).

It does.
Virtual size is transaction weight divided by 4 and weight is counting witness by computing "base size" (which is serialized size without witness) multiplied by 3 added to the "total size" (which is serialized size with witness).

FYI: Just now I have incorporated your definition as a revision in the Satoshi per byte wiki page.


People here are saying the protocol is getting harder / softer towards allowing stuff respectively, but my observations show that protocol development has pretty much been almost a deadweight as hardly anything changes inside of it.

That isn't to say that it's becoming harder, because it has really been at "almost impossible" for a long time now, but expect to see 5+ year wait times if you want your feature added into the protocol.

[franky1]

another game at play is the mempool utility
by having these 4mb bloat tx. where it only requires 75 bloat tx in mempool to then push out normal tx from being stored in mempools of normal nodes.. thus pushing the fee up of the remaining tx that get allowed to stay in mempools

yep a mempool ends up having at extremes just 75 pending transactions of 4mb each

..
think about it this way

legacy tx of 1in 2out is ~226bytes
meaning a mempool can have ~1.3m tx waiting
vs the extreme of only 75 memes with no normal tx waiting..

but both instances being 300mb waiting

..
also due to the meme spam of a 4mb tx not counting the spam(witness) as premium fee
EG if filling 4mb (4000000bytes) they should pay 4000000sats(0.04btc($1k)) as a minimum of 1sat/byte
but they are not paying $1k minimums. they are paying alot less than 1sat/byte thus under $1k if it was 4mb

emphasis again:
due to the cludgy code of cores decision of how core wants to count bytes
these memes appear are premium to stay in mempools.. and so outclass normal transactions paying more then 1sat/byte.. but reality is they are paying less than 1 sat/byte

heres one example
while mempools are trimming transactions below 5sat/byte at the moment(mempools of 300mb limit)
heres a tx that is 0.5sat/byte
https://www.blockchain.com/explorer/transactions/btc/df1d11d12d703bc3187407843bd82db684182cdccf2b156c7ce3d29b492154cc
that has been sitting in the mempools(of higher storage) for 6 days (since the 8th of march)
and found its way into a block

meaning this one tx has been aiding in keeping out hundreds of thousands of normal tx from remaining in mempools of normal nodes

thus although real world the spammy memes pay less than 1sat per byte. they are kept in mempools and normal payments of more then 1sat per byte get trimmed out of mempools when mempools get full

[Artemis3]

4 sat/b is currently the bottom for transactions and what used to take 1 now takes 10 just like the thread title says. And yeah there is a pool involved in the spam. Will others join the spam fest to make Bitcoin look bad and promote their tokens alt networks as the "solution"? Mine for spam?

[serveria.com]

4 sat/b is currently the bottom for transactions and what used to take 1 now takes 10 just like the thread title says. And yeah there is a pool involved in the spam. Will others join the spam fest to make Bitcoin look bad and promote their tokens alt networks as the "solution"? Mine for spam?

I fear it's actually much more than that. I've sent ~$70 earlier today and paid ~$1.30 in fees (10 or 11 sat/b I don't remember precisely) and guess what? The transaction hasn't been confirmed yet! I paid 1 sat/b for similar tx before the ordinals were launched. I feel like I'm actually sponsoring some teen creating zillions of monkey pics hoping to get rich quick. 

[Hispo]

4 sat/b is currently the bottom for transactions and what used to take 1 now takes 10 just like the thread title says. And yeah there is a pool involved in the spam. Will others join the spam fest to make Bitcoin look bad and promote their tokens alt networks as the "solution"? Mine for spam?

I fear it's actually much more than that. I've sent ~$70 earlier today and paid ~$1.30 in fees (10 or 11 sat/b I don't remember precisely) and guess what? The transaction hasn't been confirmed yet! I paid 1 sat/b for similar tx before the ordinals were launched. I feel like I'm actually sponsoring some teen creating zillions of monkey pics hoping to get rich quick. 

I have been "trying" to push through a small non-crucial transaction for 2$ at a fee rate of 1 sat/vbyte. I think it has been like 6 days already. 
I am already missing those nights I could send the cheapest as possible without having to worry about getting my stuff rejected. 
Alas, one truly does not know what one has, until one loses it.

Not gonna lie, I am feeling quite tempted to diversify my portfolio with some Litecoin in order to cope with this, until gets more bearable (assuming it won't get worse, though).

[pawel7777]

I have been "trying" to push through a small non-crucial transaction for 2$ at a fee rate of 1 sat/vbyte. I think it has been like 6 days already. 
I am already missing those nights I could send the cheapest as possible without having to worry about getting my stuff rejected. 
Alas, one truly does not know what one has, until one loses it.

Not gonna lie, I am feeling quite tempted to diversify my portfolio with some Litecoin in order to cope with this, until gets more bearable (assuming it won't get worse, though).

Luckily most wallets would have the option to bump the fee and push the transaction through.

I'm surprised that yours hasn't been rejected after 6 days. Can anyone explain how/when low-fee transactions get rejected from the mempool? I don't suppose there's a fixed time, but probably more of new transactions pushing out the old ones when the mempool is full etc? Or will most wallets keep re-broadcasting it until it gets confirmed?

[bitmover]

It's funny how some somewhat established members of the Bitcoin community suddenly switched from "censorship-resistant transactions" to "we need to stop this spam / bloating" and "there has to be a valid reason to make transactions". 

When the mempool is full, and you're forced to pay more, the last group of people you have to blame are those who make the transactions.

A censorship resistant,  borderless, permitionless and pseudo anonymous is still very cheap even when the mempool is full and the price is higher than 20/30 sat/vbyte.

Try to make a swift and wait for 4-5 business day after the bank authorization

[Hispo]

I have been "trying" to push through a small non-crucial transaction for 2$ at a fee rate of 1 sat/vbyte. I think it has been like 6 days already. 
I am already missing those nights I could send the cheapest as possible without having to worry about getting my stuff rejected. 
Alas, one truly does not know what one has, until one loses it.

Not gonna lie, I am feeling quite tempted to diversify my portfolio with some Litecoin in order to cope with this, until gets more bearable (assuming it won't get worse, though).

Luckily most wallets would have the option to bump the fee and push the transaction through.

I'm surprised that yours hasn't been rejected after 6 days. Can anyone explain how/when low-fee transactions get rejected from the mempool? I don't suppose there's a fixed time, but probably more of new transactions pushing out the old ones when the mempool is full etc? Or will most wallets keep re-broadcasting it until it gets confirmed?

I think it depends on the configuration of the node which the transaction was broadcast to, if you check this webpage:

https://jochen-hoenicke.de/queue/#BTC,24h,weight

You can see that Bitcoin was two buttons or options, BTC and BTC(Default).
The default configuration of the Bitcoin client seems to admit a maximum size for the mempool of 300 MB, before it starts to purge transactions which have stayed unconfirmed around 14 days in the mempool limbo. 

If anyone has a better explanation, feel free to correct me. 

[UchihaSarada]

I think it depends on the configuration of the node which the transaction was broadcast to, if you check this webpage:

https://jochen-hoenicke.de/queue/#BTC,24h,weight

You can see that Bitcoin was two buttons or options, BTC and BTC(Default).
The default configuration of the Bitcoin client seems to admit a maximum size for the mempool of 300 MB, before it starts to purge transactions which have stayed unconfirmed around 14 days in the mempool limbo.  

There are many mempools and each of them can set their own (different) times to drop unconfirmed transactions. 14 days is likely a common default settings for mempools but not all of them use that parameter.

14 days is estimated from retarget algorithm of difficulty after each 2016 blocks. With average block time is 10 minutes, it takes about 14 days to have one difficult retarget.

Similar to trading as we can use default parameter for many indicators which give us default parameter at 14 but we can customize it if we want.

[dansus021]

Yeah, I usually use mempool.space to figure out the best fee. and after reading your post it's crazy that you are using 1 sat/byte.

I always use above 15 sat/byte even tho Im using segwit address to make transactions. I hear there is Layer 2 on bitcoin network called stack and its hype right now. and bitcoin only 1 MB per block that drives the fee going crazy.

at the time i write there is 60K transaction unconfirmed


the best right now is using above 20sat to get fast confirmation or using Fee bumped if the transaction is already broadcasted.

[Artemis3]

4 sat/b is currently the bottom for transactions and what used to take 1 now takes 10 just like the thread title says. And yeah there is a pool involved in the spam. Will others join the spam fest to make Bitcoin look bad and promote their tokens alt networks as the "solution"? Mine for spam?

I fear it's actually much more than that. I've sent ~$70 earlier today and paid ~$1.30 in fees (10 or 11 sat/b I don't remember precisely) and guess what? The transaction hasn't been confirmed yet! I paid 1 sat/b for similar tx before the ordinals were launched. I feel like I'm actually sponsoring some teen creating zillions of monkey pics hoping to get rich quick. 

Yes, a bit after that post, the spam increased:



Since the beginning we have been warning that leaving this abuse/exploit alone and do nothing can only lead to a repeat of 2018 or worse... But they don't listen. Worse, certain self proclaimed miner with an elite attitude ridicule us in the dev discussion thread.

Why? because they know spamming works, it makes them money, so they will push it. More spam, less and slower actual transactions, the spam must go on, they don't want bitcoin, but bitasset, and help promote their altcoin which the leading spam pool is spearheading, yadda yadda.

They simply found a sustainable way to damage Bitcoin and are executing it.
And of course, other spammers are joining, they want a cut of the pie too...

[Hispo]

These days I noticed that there was a jump on the number of unconfirmed transactions in the mempool as well.
It catches my attention because it seems that after that sudden increase the number of transactions has done nothing but increase in a steady lineal pace.

Is there a chance some ill-intended actor is already spamming with network with the sole purpose of halting non-ordinal transactions?
Because, I feel it is quite unlikely this is a normal behavior.

I could be wrong, though.

[Artemis3]

I did a 14 sat/b tx to fund a lightning channel, that was hours ago just to receive some tip... So much for instant payments. Sure once opened it should work that way, but here is another real world example of letting spammers run rampant.

[Fatunad]

Something is brewing in the Bitcoin world? For the last 2-3 days I can I witness slow transactions and huge fees. I got used to 1sat/byte transactions and they always get through so I sent a couple of sats to myself but you can't imagine how surprised I was when I saw my tx is ~75mb from tip! My wallet suggested a fee of 10sat/bytes! So, what's going on? Is this connected with that ordinals mumbo-jumbo? 

Whenever i do make out some transactions then i do always look at on mempool.space just like on what most members or posters on this thread which it is really just that right.You could really be able
to find out on what are the suggested fees (sat/byte) which you would use whether you do like it for it to be included on next block or into the next one or something like that.
Of course we cant really be able to know on how far it would goes considering that miners would be always prioritizing into those people who do put up huge fees compared
to those who had just put up 1sat/byte. 

[serveria.com]

It's funny how some somewhat established members of the Bitcoin community suddenly switched from "censorship-resistant transactions" to "we need to stop this spam / bloating" and "there has to be a valid reason to make transactions".  

When the mempool is full, and you're forced to pay more, the last group of people you have to blame are those who make the transactions.

A censorship resistant,  borderless, permitionless and pseudo anonymous is still very cheap even when the mempool is full and the price is higher than 20/30 sat/vbyte.

Try to make a swift and wait for 4-5 business day after the bank authorization

Yeah, thanks god I'm free and no longer depend on a banker guy. Now I have to wait when a 15 yo acne-covered teen sitting in his parents basement gets tired of creating gazillions of monkey pics (or even worse, something like this: https://www.cryptodickbutts.com/) and lets me push my tx at only x10 the price I used to pay before this madness started! I guess I should be grateful!