Mempool Observer Topic

[FeeBuddy]

     

• fastestFee: 24 sat/vB
• halfHourFee: 24 sat/vB
• hourFee: 24 sat/vB
• economyFee: 24 sat/vB
• minimumFee: 17 sat/vB

[1714937546]

1714937546

[1714937546]

1714937546

[1714937546]

1714937546

[franky1]

but at the same time, there is a trade off currently, when we have some people who are very poor, and if they are buying $10 of bitcoin at a time, I hardly know how they can do that onchain without causing problems for themselves in the future, and if you are proposing BIG blocks to resolve it, that does not seem to be a tradeoff that is going to fly with a lot ofbitcoiners in order to achieve consensus, for reasons that I largely already discussed.

seems rather then reading what i actually talk about you prefer to grab the scripted narrative of the joke that is "bigblocker"
the stupid narrative that tries to quash any progress by going to insane extremes and pretending the extremes are whats being proposed
yet actual progressive proposals are not extremes.. but instead SCALINGs

Ok.  Let us just take it for granted that I do not sufficiently understand what you are proposing to change, and I am saying that until any changes are made, each of us should be striving to figure out our own ways of dealing with uncertainties in current fees and future fees.  If we cannot be sure about if various changes in the direction that you are suggesting to be "not extremes" yet we cannot take if for granted that such changes are going to happen.. unless you are talking about a variety of changes that have already been coded and are being considered for possible integration.  

I also would consider this thread to be aimed more at observing what is going on with the mempool rather than ways it could potentially be changed in the future.. although some of us could hang onto (or even continue to create) some of our smaller UTXOs if we consider that in the future there might be economical ways to spend them.

my posts are about the mempool stuff and considerations of things that can affect mempool utility to make things better for bitcoiners.. and asking about your suggestions and WHO yours/my suggestions benefit more inregards to access, utility and ease of use of the mempool and onchain usage

and of that bloated paragraph all i seen is you want people to avoid bitcoin and instead play on other systems.. doesnt sound like bitcoin adoption to me sounds like bitcoin off-boarding, bitcoin avoidance, bitcoin rejection

just remember to ask yourself if you are not owning funds on your key.. WHO IS? then realise those teaching you that pushing people into other systems sound good.. are the ones that want to own the coins whilst passing off other system balance to people.. knowing those people wont be able to claim bitcoin thus spend down the crap balance to zero and the centralised entity keeps the actual bitcoin

anyways
there are a multitude of ways to get bitcoin fee's down and tx counts up ON THE BITCOIN NETWORK. here ill mention a few

a. a fee formulae that only penalises spammers and bloaters where their formulae score for priority makes them pay more to be accepted into a block and where leaner users not spending hourly get to use cheap base rates that are not multiplied

b. leaner transactions to allow more transactions per block so individually each user pays less whilst more tx per block means pools get nice totals
    b1. close the exploits that allow 1tx to take up 4mb
    b2. new tx formats that are even shorter(leaner) than standard transactions (yep its possible)

c. uncludge the current 4mb format to not be a 1mb wall and 3mb witness wall. and instead a united 4mb space for better tx count utility
d. then scale blocks to allow even more transactions. so that more users can transact reasonably without being provoked to pay more due to stupid exploits, and bad economic policy made by dev politics that favour off  boarding bitcoiners off the network

all things in my previous post quote above help people be on the network and have their transactions not purged from mempool

so lets reign this topic back into mempool observations

whos considerations about ~"solutions"~ help who the most.. poor or elite, mine or yours

and no dont start singing the extremist bandwagon strawmen buzzwords of "bigblocker" scripted chants.. (where you have been around long enough to have learned about bitcoin enough, so should know better by now..)  where you pretend to play dumb to not know about bitcoin but strangely know all the scripted chants extremes that try to avoid talking about scaling solutions that will help transaction utility, access, ease of the mempool.. (that are not about "bigblocker" extremes.) just to avoid talking about scaling solutions and instead just want to turn this topic into an advert for other systems far more buggy/insecure.. yep other systems(to want people to leave the bitcoin network) which avoid having transactions seen in mempools or filtered into blocks

[bitmover]

By the way, FeeBuddy has not posted for 24 hours.   Has FeeBuddy's frequency been reduced or otherwise debilitated? 

Can I do that for him?




Instead of automating manual tasks, like LoyceV or DdmrDdmr do, yours truly specialise in manualising automatic tasks!

Hey, I don't know what happened to him.  I will take a look in the server. Maybe mempool api changed? I will take a look when I get home and try to fix him.

Edit: I don't know ow what happened, but he looks to be working again. I forced him manually and it looks ok now

[FeeBuddy]

     

• fastestFee: 26 sat/vB
• halfHourFee: 25 sat/vB
• hourFee: 25 sat/vB
• economyFee: 25 sat/vB
• minimumFee: 16 sat/vB

[JayJuanGee]

[edited out]

whos considerations about ~"solutions"~ help who the most.. poor or elite, mine or yours

Of course, you are the greatest franky.  I have nothing materially important to say (that i have not already said) in regards to how folks might attempt to prepare themselves for present and/or future transaction fees..

and no dont start singing the extremist bandwagon strawmen buzzwords of "bigblocker" scripted chants.. (where you have been around long enough to have learned about bitcoin enough, so should know better by now..)  where you pretend to play dumb to not know about bitcoin but strangely know all the scripted chants extremes that try to avoid talking about scaling solutions that will help transaction utility, access, ease of the mempool.. (that are not about "bigblocker" extremes.) just to avoid talking about scaling solutions and instead just want to turn this topic into an advert for other systems far more buggy/insecure.. yep other systems(to want people to leave the bitcoin network) which avoid having transactions seen in mempools or filtered into blocks

Those are some pretty BIG accusations.  I must say. You are probably giving me too much credit in regards to my supposed cooperative conspiracies.. . but yeah, it may well be that I have absorbed most if not all of the suspect talking points through osmosis.

[FeeBuddy]

     

• fastestFee: 26 sat/vB
• halfHourFee: 25 sat/vB
• hourFee: 25 sat/vB
• economyFee: 25 sat/vB
• minimumFee: 20 sat/vB

[franky1]

[edited out]

whos considerations about ~"solutions"~ help who the most.. poor or elite, mine or yours

Of course, you are the greatest franky.  I have nothing materially important to say (that i have not already said) in regards to how folks might attempt to prepare themselves for present and/or future transaction fees..

its not about a whos the greatest.. im not here for ass-kissery.. never have been
 its about you admitting who does it benefit.. poor or elites (which you still dont want to answer properly)
its about think for yourself about the crap that you have been taught through social scripts(your over use of certain words, phrases and promotions proves it), who does your preferential mantra benefit the most.

im not here for ass-kissery.. never have been
who does your recited mantra of other idiots.. benefit the most

its about you coming to the realisation that the stuff you want to promote is not even things that benefit you.
its an attempt to realise you are shooting yourself in the foot by promoting things that are not aiding your own involvement in bitcoin.

its about learning the stuff you promote is not thing that will help out those that want to have their transactions in mempools and relayed to mining pools to get into blocks,
instead your mantra you got taught is about evading even being in mempools, evading even being in blocks, evading having own funds on own utxo and instead just sticking with the status quo of if they did try to send or receive transaction they are more likely to just get purged from mempool and never get relayed to mining pools to be added to a block.
thus not even a solution to the problems that created annoyances for those that dont want to be purged from the mempool.

your preference is not a solution to the annoyances observed in the mempool. its instead evading being observed in mempool in its totality

[FeeBuddy]

     

• fastestFee: 24 sat/vB
• halfHourFee: 24 sat/vB
• hourFee: 24 sat/vB
• economyFee: 24 sat/vB
• minimumFee: 16 sat/vB

[FeeBuddy]

     

• fastestFee: 28 sat/vB
• halfHourFee: 26 sat/vB
• hourFee: 25 sat/vB
• economyFee: 25 sat/vB
• minimumFee: 21 sat/vB

[Wind_FURY]

and no dont start singing the extremist bandwagon strawmen buzzwords of "bigblocker" scripted chants.. (where you have been around long enough to have learned about bitcoin enough, so should know better by now..)  where you pretend to play dumb to not know about bitcoin but strangely know all the scripted chants extremes that try to avoid talking about scaling solutions that will help transaction utility, access, ease of the mempool.. (that are not about "bigblocker" extremes.) just to avoid talking about scaling solutions and instead just want to turn this topic into an advert for other systems far more buggy/insecure.. yep other systems(to want people to leave the bitcoin network) which avoid having transactions seen in mempools or filtered into blocks

Those are some pretty BIG accusations.  I must say. You are probably giving me too much credit in regards to my supposed cooperative conspiracies.. . but yeah, it may well be that I have absorbed most if not all of the suspect talking points through osmosis.

That's typically the usual frankandbeans response when you're starting to get your viewpoint/argument across, and when he's recognizing that the readers are learning the truth of the matter. He'll start making ad hominem attacks to confuse the readers, and try to make you look that you're the person misinforming everyone.

Everyone simply needs to read the trust-ratings written by Bitcoin Core Developers Andrew Chow and Gregory Maxwell. I'm confused why people listen to him.

     

• fastestFee: 26 sat/vB
• halfHourFee: 25 sat/vB
• hourFee: 25 sat/vB
• economyFee: 25 sat/vB
• minimumFee: 16 sat/vB

Is that a "Double Top" Pattern? Hahaha.

[JayJuanGee]

[edited out]

whos considerations about ~"solutions"~ help who the most.. poor or elite, mine or yours

Of course, you are the greatest franky.  I have nothing materially important to say (that i have not already said) in regards to how folks might attempt to prepare themselves for present and/or future transaction fees..

its not about a whos the greatest.. im not here for ass-kissery.. never have been
 its about you admitting who does it benefit.. poor or elites (which you still dont want to answer properly)

I already said what I was going to say.  There is no need to say more, especially in regards to your further attempts to narrow the questions into attempts to deal with the ought rather than the is.

its about think for yourself about the crap that you have been taught through social scripts(your over use of certain words, phrases and promotions proves it), who does your preferential mantra benefit the most.

I am already think for myself.  Don't you think?

hahahahaha

Obviously you don't think so, or at least you are making shit up to proclaim that it is your belief (or conclusion based on everything you know) that I am not sufficiently and/or adequately thinking for myself in the terms of frank1 standards.

im not here for ass-kissery.. never have been
who does your recited mantra of other idiots.. benefit the most

Hopefully each of us can figure out our own ways to interact with the chain or to use various 2nd or 3rd party mechanisms in such a way that we become more informed by participating in threads like this one.

its about you coming to the realisation that the stuff you want to promote is not even things that benefit you.

I am not promoting anything that goes beyond attempting to be practical for anyone who might want to involve himself in transaction in bitcoin. If there are ways of interacting that I don't know about, then I am more than willing to learn. Furthermore, I cannot even keep up with my own experimentation, since there are ONLY so many hours in a day in order to attempt to try out solutions that I have not yet tried.  Accordingly sometimes it helps to hear about the experiences of others in order to decide which kinds of solutions might be worth trying out.

its an attempt to realise you are shooting yourself in the foot by promoting things that are not aiding your own involvement in bitcoin.

You are repeating yourself about nonsense, and I even question how helpful any of this back and forth is to anyone.. in the direction of:  "Let's hear frank rant about how others are not bitcoiners enough under franky's definition of what should be a bitcoiner."

its about learning the stuff you promote is not thing that will help out those that want to have their transactions in mempools and relayed to mining pools to get into blocks,
instead your mantra you got taught is about evading even being in mempools, evading even being in blocks, evading having own funds on own utxo and instead just sticking with the status quo of if they did try to send or receive transaction they are more likely to just get purged from mempool and never get relayed to mining pools to be added to a block.
thus not even a solution to the problems that created annoyances for those that dont want to be purged from the mempool.

You seem to be projecting upon me things that I did not say, even if some of what I said may have some of the consequences that you said.. so yeah, using 2nd, 3rd layer options would not be using the mempool as often, but still may well end up tying into the mempool, depending on which option that we might discuss..

your preference is not a solution to the annoyances observed in the mempool. its instead evading being observed in mempool in its totality

Again, I doubt that I am promoting that...even though if some predictions into the future might be that some people might avoid (minimize or be priced out of) interacting with the mempool if it is not economical for them.
Maybe one thing that I might add is that if the transaction fees are currently coming back down and eating through the 20 sats per vbyte backlog, then we might be able to conclude that whatever was being done in the last 3 months or so in order to keep the fees high might not be sustainable (and maybe costing the attackers too much), and it may well be better to not change anything in any kind of substantial ways rather than to be forced (or rushed) into some kind of a change that is largely being artificially justified by the three month backlog in order to cause people to speculate that something in bitcoin is broken or some urgent change is needed (when it is not)... and so yeah, there might not be as much urgency as some complainers (cough, cough franky1) are trying to spout out about.

[bitmover]

Is that a "Double Top" Pattern? Hahaha.

Someone is paying so much for transactions
 Makes no sense.

I also see lots of blocks in the mempool  and many blocks 100% filled with transactions like this, 60 inputs (legacy) and 1 output (segwit)

https://mempool.space/pt/tx/30e69caa762c832bafb0b1a95c67a0d1edb5986dfb69c983f5fba0343aa1300e

Someone is creating this transactions to flood the network?

[JayJuanGee]

Is that a "Double Top" Pattern? Hahaha.

Someone is paying so much for transactions
 Makes no sense.

I also see lots of blocks in the mempool  and many blocks 100% filled with transactions like this, 60 inputs (legacy) and 1 output (segwit)
https://mempool.space/pt/tx/30e69caa762c832bafb0b1a95c67a0d1edb5986dfb69c983f5fba0343aa1300e
Someone is creating this transactions to flood the network?

So even if the current transaction fees are coming down - like I mentioned earlier about getting into the widdling away of the 20 sats per vbyte backlog - as shown in the below image:



https://jochen-hoenicke.de/queue/#BTC,1w,weight

the attack is ongoing.. but still way more reasonable in the last couple of weeks as compared to the prior 2.5 months.

[franky1]

Maybe one thing that I might add is that if the transaction fees are currently coming back down and eating through the 20 sats per vbyte backlog, then we might be able to conclude that whatever was being done in the last 3 months or so in order to keep the fees high might not be sustainable (and maybe costing the attackers too much), and it may well be better to not change anything in any kind of substantial ways rather than to be forced (or rushed) into some kind of a change that is largely being artificially justified by the three month backlog in order to cause people to speculate that something in bitcoin is broken or some urgent change is needed (when it is not)... and so yeah, there might not be as much urgency as some complainers (cough, cough franky1) are trying to spout out about.

observing mempool you will see the fees didnt come down to allow blocks to eat through the 20sat/vb backlog
instead the 20sat/vb got purged. then some 16sat/vb added and got purged , then some 20sat/vb added and got purged because the min went upto 21 before new fresh tx added to mempool from 16sat/vb up.. and then purged again back to 20

     

• fastestFee: 26 sat/vB
• halfHourFee: 25 sat/vB
• hourFee: 25 sat/vB
• economyFee: 25 sat/vB
• minimumFee: 16 sat/vB

     

• fastestFee: 26 sat/vB
• halfHourFee: 25 sat/vB
• hourFee: 25 sat/vB
• economyFee: 25 sat/vB
• minimumFee: 20 sat/vB

     

• fastestFee: 24 sat/vB
• halfHourFee: 24 sat/vB
• hourFee: 24 sat/vB
• economyFee: 24 sat/vB
• minimumFee: 16 sat/vB

     

• fastestFee: 28 sat/vB
• halfHourFee: 26 sat/vB
• hourFee: 25 sat/vB
• economyFee: 25 sat/vB
• minimumFee: 21 sat/vB

you can see that jochen-hoenicke retains tx below 20sat/vb because HIS mempool is set at 550MB instead of standard 300
but by seeing the straight line(unnatural) of the 20-21 colours they are purged by majority which means only jochen-hoenicke is retaining them hence the straight line. where most natural transactions of 300mb mempools are purging cheap fees
(if very cheap tx were being added you would see wiggly lines of tx's coming and going as they get relayed in - confirmed out)

if you zoom right in on the jochen graph you might see the very rare one pixel change meaning maybe a little amount of cheap tx got into some lucky block. but  the overall straight line shows there is no real coming of going of tx of that fee point because they get purged.. not eaten by block

the "min" is more of a purge line.

[joker_josue]

you can see that jochen-hoenicke retains tx below 20sat/vb because HIS mempool is set at 550MB instead of standard 300
but by seeing the straight line(unnatural) of the 20-21 colours they are purged by majority which means only jochen-hoenicke is retaining them hence the straight line. where most natural transactions of 300mb mempools are purging cheap fees
(if very cheap tx were being added you would see wiggly lines of tx's coming and going as they get relayed in - confirmed out)

In another topic I'm developing, here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5483213

I'm gathering some information about the blocks mined in each difficulty cycle, and that includes the average rates for each block mined.
And it is really interesting to note that in the last cycle, there was no block with an average rate below 50sat/vb.

[JayJuanGee]

Maybe one thing that I might add is that if the transaction fees are currently coming back down and eating through the 20 sats per vbyte backlog, then we might be able to conclude that whatever was being done in the last 3 months or so in order to keep the fees high might not be sustainable (and maybe costing the attackers too much), and it may well be better to not change anything in any kind of substantial ways rather than to be forced (or rushed) into some kind of a change that is largely being artificially justified by the three month backlog in order to cause people to speculate that something in bitcoin is broken or some urgent change is needed (when it is not)... and so yeah, there might not be as much urgency as some complainers (cough, cough franky1) are trying to spout out about.

observing mempool you will see the fees didnt come down to allow blocks to eat through the 20sat/vb backlog

Maybe my language was not precise enough for uie-pooie..

I did not say that they ate through the 20 sats per vbyte territory.. I had meant to say that it has been in the process of eating through.. and so maybe you are getting caught up upon language in order to quibble about meaningless matters.

My subsequent chart had shown that there are ranges of backlog, and I had ONLY provided the last week which shows that largely the widdling away of backlog has been in the 20-25 sats per vbyte range, and prior to that it was in higher ranges such as 25-30 sats per vbyte, 30-40 sats per vbyte, 40-50 sats per vbyte etc etc etc...

So we can even zoom out further on that same chart that I had already provided earlier and see the backlog continuing to get widdled away, including that currently, in the past week or so, we having the 20-25 sats per vbyte backlog widdled away.

instead the 20sat/vb got purged. then some 16sat/vb added and got purged , then some 20sat/vb added and got purged because the min went upto 21 before new fresh tx added to mempool from 16sat/vb up.. and then purged again back to 20

     

• fastestFee: 26 sat/vB
• halfHourFee: 25 sat/vB
• hourFee: 25 sat/vB
• economyFee: 25 sat/vB
• minimumFee: 16 sat/vB

     

• fastestFee: 26 sat/vB
• halfHourFee: 25 sat/vB
• hourFee: 25 sat/vB
• economyFee: 25 sat/vB
• minimumFee: 20 sat/vB

     

• fastestFee: 24 sat/vB
• halfHourFee: 24 sat/vB
• hourFee: 24 sat/vB
• economyFee: 24 sat/vB
• minimumFee: 16 sat/vB

     

• fastestFee: 28 sat/vB
• halfHourFee: 26 sat/vB
• hourFee: 25 sat/vB
• economyFee: 25 sat/vB
• minimumFee: 21 sat/vB

you can see that jochen-hoenicke retains tx below 20sat/vb because HIS mempool is set at 550MB instead of standard 300
but by seeing the straight line(unnatural) of the 20-21 colours they are purged by majority which means only jochen-hoenicke is retaining them hence the straight line. where most natural transactions of 300mb mempools are purging cheap fees
(if very cheap tx were being added you would see wiggly lines of tx's coming and going as they get relayed in - confirmed out)

I am not presuming that transactions are being processed for lower than the backlog amounts, so right now, if you are trying to be economical as you can, then to be safer, it would likely be better to place your transaction fees in the 25-30 sats per vbyte range rather than in the 20-25 sats per vbyte or any lower than 25-30 sats per vbyte... .so of course, as the backlog gets widdled away then we are able to put our economic transactions lower, but if want to be sure that they go through quickly we have to go a bit higher than the backlog and hope that any spike is not sustainable.. since it does seem to take a bit of time to build up the backlog in the various ranges, and I still am not even claiming to have much clues about the causes, even though as many of us here, I am not suspecting the backlog to be as organic as it might be being presented to be.. but hey I don't know enough.. so I am more than willing to wait to attempt to weigh what others think or what kinds of evidence is presented regarding plausible causes and theories of sustainability of keeping fees up like that and if shenanigans might be going on or just shenanigans that are costing the attackers a lot of money to keep up the ruse..

if you zoom right in on the jochen graph you might see the very rare one pixel change meaning maybe a little amount of cheap tx got into some lucky block. but  the overall straight line shows there is no real coming of going of tx of that fee point because they get purged.. not eaten by block

the "min" is more of a purge line.

Maybe there are better charts to show your purge theory?  I admit that I heard about some of these purging ideas but I have not really looked into it.. Also, I am not opposed to the idea that low ball transactions might sometimes get purged or some software might not allow fees to get set below certain amounts, but I just don't see how transactions would be being purged at anywhere within 30% or so of the backlog line (referring to the jochen graph).. and then also if the backlog line is continuing to go down, then there seems to be less and less reason to be engaging in any purging.. except maybe way below 5 sats per vbyte or something like that, and I had also heard that some wallets might not allow transactions to get set when they are at certain low levels..  .. but to me the backlog still seems to be going down... at least for now...and really in the last 30 days, even though the there has been a lot of transaction fee-related suffering in the last 3 months.

[FeeBuddy]

     

• fastestFee: 24 sat/vB
• halfHourFee: 24 sat/vB
• hourFee: 24 sat/vB
• economyFee: 24 sat/vB
• minimumFee: 21 sat/vB

[FeeBuddy]

     

• fastestFee: 26 sat/vB
• halfHourFee: 25 sat/vB
• hourFee: 25 sat/vB
• economyFee: 25 sat/vB
• minimumFee: 18 sat/vB

[Wind_FURY]

Is that a "Double Top" Pattern? Hahaha.

Someone is paying so much for transactions
 Makes no sense.

I also see lots of blocks in the mempool  and many blocks 100% filled with transactions like this, 60 inputs (legacy) and 1 output (segwit)

https://mempool.space/pt/tx/30e69caa762c832bafb0b1a95c67a0d1edb5986dfb69c983f5fba0343aa1300e

Someone is creating this transactions to flood the network?

But it DID make sense, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5478905.msg63607204#msg63607204

Canchain,and MoBox.

Two more "projects" building on top of Bitcoin that are using their capital, both human and financial capital, very inefficiently by wasting their time and resources in developing those projects that will be hard to boot-strap with users because the network will be too expensive to use.

SatoshiDice and there was an on-chain sports betting service that closed because running everything on-chain, although very ideal, was becoming impractical and too expensive.

[FeeBuddy]

     

• fastestFee: 24 sat/vB
• halfHourFee: 24 sat/vB
• hourFee: 24 sat/vB
• economyFee: 24 sat/vB
• minimumFee: 12 sat/vB