Mempool Observer Topic

[bitmover]

How about creating an account named Fee Buddy and posting it once an hour just like ChartBuddy? and then someone like phillipma will join the thread to stay above FeeBuddy! Even though it's a funny idea, but it won't be bad.

That's a perfect idea. If @bitmover wants, he can create this account, otherwise I could make a new account and set a cronjob to just post with this API once per hour.

However, the font is difficult to read. It would be better if it used a bold font or was a bit larger.

Where would I post it? Here or in wo?

Here you go  bigger and in bold




Just add the parameter bold to any of my api to show in bold font

You can also change colors. Just take a look at documentation
https://bitcoindata.science/bitcointalk-api.html

[stompix]

I get the character of the topic, and I really like your sarcasm.

Well, appreciated, most around don't feel like that, they take it like a declaration of war!

I'm unable to connect to my server right now so I'm not able to get any data from my node, question to the guys running one a default 300MB, is the number accurate? I changed that months ago and I know it broke though over 1GB weeks ago but that much in purging?

A little late, but this is mempool from my end: https://talkimg.com/images/2023/12/31/IWaRv.png.

I managed to get ahold of mine somewhere around 4 or 5 am, god knows what time was it, switched back to the default and after half an hour it was purging around 40sat/b probably only to get worse as it was connecting to more and more , I just switched back to x10 the value and shows 1.45GB, just lol!

What the f*** is wrong with some, it's 31st for god's sake!

How about creating an account named Fee Buddy and posting it once an hour just like ChartBuddy? and then someone like phillipma will join the thread to stay above FeeBuddy!

And we're going to have the few miner around here cheering every time Feebudy goes up and disgustingly licking our fingers full of fudge thinking of those fees!  
This probably was my dream before I realized I have not a single input worth $300 in my spending wallet so I'm going to use....visa....to pay my bill.

Yesterday I was trying to move some BTC from my Electrum wallet to an exchange and Noticed that I could not even make the transaction with 50 sat/vB. I understand the fee is too high. But, there was a time when we were able to make 1 sat/vB transaction even though the recommended fee was over 10 sat/vB. Now, Electrum doesn't even allow us to make the transaction. Currently, the mempool purging transactions of <74 sat/vB. What a fucking day we are heading into.

Change your servers in the configuration, there are still plenty who use larger mempools and still accept 20sat/b, not that it would ever get confirmed but after that you have a shot with Viabtc.

LE at 6 pm, so my last look at the mempool for the year and this is how it looks:
Perfect natural organic traffic

and...I don't even know how to call shit bs

[NotATether]

Where would I post it? Here or in wo?

~
Just add the parameter bold to any of my api to show in bold font

You can also change colors. Just take a look at documentation
https://bitcoindata.science/bitcointalk-api.html

Nice.

I don't think WO people are interested in fees, most of them have huge stashes anyway, so probably here.

[bitmover]

Where would I post it? Here or in wo?

~
Just add the parameter bold to any of my api to show in bold font

You can also change colors. Just take a look at documentation
https://bitcoindata.science/bitcointalk-api.html

Nice.

I don't think WO people are interested in fees, most of them have huge stashes anyway, so probably here.

I think I will need to create an api to show fees not in real time, but in the time it was posted.

Otherwise it won't make sense to post every hour...

[Learn Bitcoin]

That's a perfect idea. If @bitmover wants, he can create this account, otherwise I could make a new account and set a cronjob to just post with this API once per hour.

Actually, the Idea came from the OP where Stompix already said;

Maybe we can get one of the AI here with all their tricks and coding skillzzz to make a fee buddy!  
So, till then let's start:

I thought it was for fun. I didn't remember about bitmover's bitcoindata.science until he posted the "fee" image. So, I thought, why not? So, the Thanks should go to stompix.

Where would I post it? Here or in wo?

I also suggest posting it here

And we're going to have the few miner around here cheering every time Feebudy goes up and disgustingly licking our fingers full of fudge thinking of those fees! 
This probably was my dream before I realized I have not a single input worth $300 in my spending wallet so I'm going to use....

Well, I don't know many miners except phillipma. We might see him around. Imagine this thread becomes a mega thread, and you have to create a self-moderated thread because of spammers! The signature campaign will exclude this thread from posting. LOL. I can see the future already.

[ABCbits]

BSV is poor example of big block size. It's doomed to failed since it's associated with faketoshi, don't care about cost/difficulty of running full node[1] where many decide to drop support[2] and even implement confiscation stealing mechanism[4].

All the Faketoshi stuff aside, its blockchain is approaching 10 terabytes and is supported by less than 100 nodes. One mining pool dominates with 54% of the hash rate. There couldn't be a clearer picture of why large blockchains leads to centralization. You can say, "ah but nobody wants to run a coin led by Faketoshi," and you'd be right, but even if he stepped out of the picture completely, I sincerely doubt things would be any different.

Even if faketoshi stepped out now, it's far too late since the damage has been done. And Etheruem would be somewhat better example since it has 16.5TB storage usage[1], but with 7.3K node running[2]. Although node number is rather high since Ethereum use PoS.

[1] https://etherscan.io/chartsync/chainarchive
[2] https://goto.etherscan.com/nodetracker

[nutildah]

Even if faketoshi stepped out now, it's far too late since the damage has been done. And Etheruem would be somewhat better example since it has 16.5TB storage usage[1], but with 7.3K node running[2]. Although node number is rather high since Ethereum use PoS.

For Ethereum, full nodes and archive nodes are distinct kinds of nodes. Full nodes are heavily pruned and only require the last 128 blocks of data to be stored. They represent the overwhelming majority of nodes counted on the Etherscan nodetracker page. Archival nodes, as the name implies, comprise the entire historical chain state and number between 4 and 12 in total.

Its actually not a problem if the archive node count dropped to zero; the entire chain state history could be extrapolated from the last 128 blocks of data, which is about 308 GB, and a new archival node spun up. Apparently this takes at least a month to accomplish, however.

https://www.alchemy.com/overviews/archive-nodes

[franky1]

in crypto
full nodes offer full services.. emphasis on the word full

other nodes with certain services disabled, switched off are not full.. but if you want to use the pronunciation word to describe pruned nodes. call the fool nodes

[Wind_FURY]

But isn't there a non-zero chance that it would also open more opportunities for some entities to send larger payloads of "spam" per block and store them in the Bitcoin blockchain?

That's exactly the reason we need to decrease the blocksize to 100 kb to kill all possible spam!  

But what assurances would a block size increase truly give the network that it wouldn't suffer the same kind of congestion that it's currently experiencing? What it might do is encourage Ordinals users/developers to embed larger data sizes in the Bitcoin blockchain.

Plus Dogecoin and every other major altcoin don't give the same security assurances as Bitcoin. Solana I believe, during the last bull cycle, stopped producing blocks for hours because of network congestion. That should never happen to Bitcoin.

It happens more often than you think, just a quick heads-up since this is mainly a topic about the state of the mempool, block 823575 was 34 minutes late:



Happy 2024 oh wait 374sat/vb!

No what happened to Solana was different, Bitcoin never stopped producing blocks.

Furthermore, I know the high fees are annoying, but it's how the network was designed with the regulated block sizes and the fee market.

[NotATether]

BSV is poor example of big block size. It's doomed to failed since it's associated with faketoshi, don't care about cost/difficulty of running full node[1] where many decide to drop support[2] and even implement confiscation stealing mechanism[4].

All the Faketoshi stuff aside, its blockchain is approaching 10 terabytes and is supported by less than 100 nodes. One mining pool dominates with 54% of the hash rate. There couldn't be a clearer picture of why large blockchains leads to centralization. You can say, "ah but nobody wants to run a coin led by Faketoshi," and you'd be right, but even if he stepped out of the picture completely, I sincerely doubt things would be any different.

Even if faketoshi stepped out now, it's far too late since the damage has been done. And Etheruem would be somewhat better example since it has 16.5TB storage usage[1], but with 7.3K node running[2]. Although node number is rather high since Ethereum use PoS.

[1] https://etherscan.io/chartsync/chainarchive
[2] https://goto.etherscan.com/nodetracker

Honestly you could wager a bet with someone that BSV's blockchain in 3-5 years is going to be larger than Ethereum's.

There are some dedicated servers I know at places like Hetzner, OVH, where you can acquire that kind of storage, but it would only fit in a RAID-0 configuration - very risky for data loss. But many of them do not allow running cryptocurrency nodes in the first place, and also nobody's really interested in running a node on top of that, so that puts the nail in its coffin.

[stompix]

And we're going to have the few miner around here cheering every time Feebudy goes up and disgustingly licking our fingers full of fudge thinking of those fees! 
This probably was my dream before I realized I have not a single input worth $300 in my spending wallet so I'm going to use....

Well, I don't know many miners except phillipma. We might see him around.

Juts in this topic present there is mikeywith and you might look at what I said, when regarding miners, I used "our" 
Of course , I'm hobby sized and even before I was running in the very low PH area!

Imagine this thread becomes a mega thread, and you have to create a self-moderated thread because of spammers! The signature campaign will exclude this thread from posting. LOL. I can see the future already.

To be honest, couldn't care less, a signature ban would mean the end of quota post so a bit of end of spam too, if people would engage in genuine discussions 1/100 of the posts I would still consider it a net positive factor!

But isn't there a non-zero chance that it would also open more opportunities for some entities to send larger payloads of "spam" per block and store them in the Bitcoin blockchain?

People will not drive each 100 cars at the same time just because they have 100 lines of roads just as they don't buy 100 tv cause they have 100 channels.
Assuming half of the traffic is ordinals, then in an event of x10 space they will need to cough up 19x times more transactions, costing them from 0.9 BTC per block as we speak nearly 1BTC each block! That's with 10MB!

And before you say something about personal nodes, need for decentralization:
- Nobody has a problem that an M63S runs at 7300.00W which would blow the fuses and melt the cables in most houses
- Nobody has a problem that half of the LN nodes are hosted with google and amazon https://mempool.space/lightning
/rant over

[franky1]

But what assurances would a block size increase truly give the network that it wouldn't suffer the same kind of congestion that it's currently experiencing? What it might do is encourage Ordinals users/developers to embed larger data sizes in the Bitcoin blockchain.

assurances can be made. such as quashing the ability that transactions can take up so much space for one transaction.(lean tx)
assurances can be made that spam be charged at a premium. (fee forumlae)
assurances can be made by not relaying unconditioned opcodes

code is great, code creates rules, core devs relaxed the rules, they can strengthen them again

[mikeywith]

Juts in this topic present there is mikeywith and you might look at what I said, when regarding miners, I used "our" 
Of course , I'm hobby sized and even before I was running in the very low PH area!

I can't say I don't enjoy the extra reward  , that would be straight-out lying  , although I would prefer steady medium fees than these crazy spikes of 300-500 sats Vbyte, i'd rather see fees stay steady at 10-20 sats/Vbyte, this would boost the mining rewards as well as make the network usable, I mean even 30-40 sats being the baseline is certainly better than 500 sats/Vbyte yesterday, 20 sats/ Vbyte today and then 100 sats/ Vbyte sats tomorrow, too high a fee is bad, and when it's coupled with "unpredicted" fee it gets worse.

[cryptosize]

Juts in this topic present there is mikeywith and you might look at what I said, when regarding miners, I used "our" 
Of course , I'm hobby sized and even before I was running in the very low PH area!

I can't say I don't enjoy the extra reward  , that would be straight-out lying  , although I would prefer steady medium fees than these crazy spikes of 300-500 sats Vbyte, i'd rather see fees stay steady at 10-20 sats/Vbyte, this would boost the mining rewards as well as make the network usable, I mean even 30-40 sats being the baseline is certainly better than 500 sats/Vbyte yesterday, 20 sats/ Vbyte today and then 100 sats/ Vbyte sats tomorrow, too high a fee is bad, and when it's coupled with "unpredicted" fee it gets worse.

This whole BTC fees story reminds me of olive oil prices in 2023-2024...

Producers love it, consumers hate it. Win-lose situation.

[Learn Bitcoin]

Juts in this topic present there is mikeywith and you might look at what I said, when regarding miners, I used "our"  Of course , I'm hobby sized and even before I was running in the very low PH area!

Yes, I didn't notice that you have used "our". But, sometimes I use the word "our' even if I am not part of the group. Anyway, nice to know some miners! Maybe I should check the mining section more often to know some miners and learn things. Now, I remember seeing you and mikeywith in the Bitcoin mining section in one of my threads.

To be honest, couldn't care less, a signature ban would mean the end of quota post so a bit of end of spam too, if people would engage in genuine discussions 1/100 of the posts I would still consider it a net positive factor!

Some spammers will still spawn up because you know what they are looking for. BTW, The fee is around 90 sat/vB at this moment. still, I don't want to dare to transfer some BTC with this rate. I have to consolidate some TX.

[stompix]

Well, seems like the Kramer effect was more serious on the mempool than on the price, at first glance I though Viabtc mined two consecutive blocks but no,



Seems like the fees are back under 50sat/b, not great not terrible!
Of course it's still almost like holiday in the most of the world, it's barely 4 am in Europe so by tomorrow evening they might grow again but still the huge wall of fees is decreasing, from record high of 240Mvb till 10 sat/vb we're down to 185Mvb, although there are still incoming transactions seems like nobody is that eager to pay over 100sat/vb for a tx.

~
Some spammers will still spawn up because you know what they are looking for. BTW, The fee is around 90 sat/vB at this moment. still, I don't want to dare to transfer some BTC with this rate. I have to consolidate some TX.

Seems like we've both forgot a thing, low fees if indeed this is a trend will kill this topic faster than spammers will be able to do it! Don't know if I should feel sad or why should I if ever.

[Learn Bitcoin]

although there are still incoming transactions seems like nobody is that eager to pay over 100sat/vb for a tx.

I wanted to discuss a thing that I noticed for a long time but didn't ask.
Sometimes I notice that some people replace their transactions with fees like 1000 sat/vB even though the recommended fee was around 100 sat/vB. Their previous fee was already enough to include their transaction on a block but it was waiting to be included in a block. But the person keep bumping it from 500 to 600 sat/vB and then 600 to 1000 sat/vB. Should I call them dumb people?
For example, look at the image below 

Seems like we've both forgot a thing, low fees if indeed this is a trend will kill this topic faster than spammers will be able to do it! Don't know if I should feel sad or why should I if ever.

I don't think you should feel sad because you are not here just to increase your post count. People like you with genuine interest won't feel sad even if this thread dies. I know that you want cheap fees too  

[NotATether]

Seems like we've both forgot a thing, low fees if indeed this is a trend will kill this topic faster than spammers will be able to do it! Don't know if I should feel sad or why should I if ever.

Fees aren't going low if there's one bajillion transactions in the mempool all paying the same fee.

Looks like Ordinals spammers have learned their lesson about paying high fees, but now they have replaced that tactic with making all 20sat/byte transactions and somehow expecting to beat the curve.

It's a slow squeezing if you ask me, because fees have been stuck at 41 sats/vbyte for a while, so some might jump the gun and pay 50 sats and the Ordinals mass will tweak their fee to be slightly higher, and so on.

[bitmover]

Seems like we've both forgot a thing, low fees if indeed this is a trend will kill this topic faster than spammers will be able to do it! Don't know if I should feel sad or why should I if ever.

Fees aren't going low if there's one bajillion transactions in the mempool all paying the same fee.

Looks like Ordinals spammers have learned their lesson about paying high fees, but now they have replaced that tactic with making all 20sat/byte transactions and somehow expecting to beat the curve.

It's a slow squeezing if you ask me, because fees have been stuck at 41 sats/vbyte for a while, so some might jump the gun and pay 50 sats and the Ordinals mass will tweak their fee to be slightly higher, and so on.

I think there is 50 sat/vbyte wall to be break. There are so many transactions there!

[cryptosize]

although there are still incoming transactions seems like nobody is that eager to pay over 100sat/vb for a tx.

I wanted to discuss a thing that I noticed for a long time but didn't ask.
Sometimes I notice that some people replace their transactions with fees like 1000 sat/vB even though the recommended fee was around 100 sat/vB. Their previous fee was already enough to include their transaction on a block but it was waiting to be included in a block. But the person keep bumping it from 500 to 600 sat/vB and then 600 to 1000 sat/vB. Should I call them dumb people?
For example, look at the image below 

No, they're not dumb, they're most likely bad actors trying to raise fees permanently.