Odalv
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1414
Merit: 1000
|
|
July 11, 2015, 10:51:49 PM |
|
iCEBREAKER makes 2 posts IN A ROW without ever realizing they espouse mutually incompatible futures for bitcoin. The first talks about how fees will increase given limited supply of transaction space (block size) -- a fact that was never in doubt. And it includes an awesomely honest quote from MP (which others have already commented on) which basically espouses plutocracy -- rule by the rich (although "rule" in this context may be more that the rich do whatever they want and everybody else sucks it up). The second post talks about the growth and value of the "underground economy" (of which the black markets are a subset) and how technologies should be focused on it. However, the underground economy is characterized by lots of small transactions. The underground economy isn't going to fit in 1 MB, and can't afford high txn fees (please read Hernando De Soto, The mystery of Capital). The only thing that will fit the 1MB block limit profile are large settlements between banking institutions. The recent spam was a technical test and succeeded, as far as it went (we did not see the sustained mempool growth we will see when demand is consistently above 100%). But it was not a social test. Recently on reddit we are hearing exciting reports of 1000s of new customers (likely operating in the underground economy) getting their first bitcoin ($5 to $10 worth) for backpage advertisements. What if the message coming from them had been different? What if it had been: "This is unusable. I don't want to pay this $1 (aggregate of a minimum of 3 txns, 1 xfer to wallet, 1 to plausible deniability address, 1 to backpage) fee to get $5 of backpage ads. And its taking forever to see the bitcoin actually show up in my phone!" Frappuccino_doc's car insurance is about to go up. Because the Gavinmobile just got wr3cked, again. EDIT: Great minds think alike: The recent surge in Backpage BTC use proves how spot on Justus was with his Black Market blog post. Its obvious that BTC will change how we do commerce, no the other way around.
Agreed. Justus hit it out of the park with that one. Sigworthy quotes therein: I admire how you care about poor africans who cannot afford to pay 0.001BTC for transaction while "you"(your white horse) stole 3,000 BTC into your pocket.
|
|
|
|
thezerg
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1246
Merit: 1010
|
|
July 12, 2015, 02:16:36 AM |
|
I admire how you care about poor africans who cannot afford to pay 0.001BTC for transaction while "you"(your white horse) stole 3,000 BTC into your pocket.
?? You're confusing me with Cypherdoc and claims on hashfast? @iCEBREAKER: while its true of course that black markets have a high margin and so therefore can handle high transaction fees, my honest hope for Bitcoin is that it allows every person to "be their own bank". I hope that it is not solely useful as currency of choice for criminal activity due to high transaction fees. That betrays the promise of crypto-currency (IMHO) RE: sidechains and Lightning -- these are vaporware right now, and I have seen too many 100million dollar startups fail due to a great vaporware story. Products have failed because they promise V2 with all these features, so people choose to wait rather than buy V1. But if you rewind this thread about 6 months you'll see that I was an avid supporter sidechains and lightning. Even if the technical details are a slam-dunk, the organizational details may be problematic. We don't know if individual companies will be backing these functions and therefore be pressure points and behave just like CoinCafe has done for the completely legal action of posting an ad on Backpage -- that is, block it due to fear of litigation. There is TREMENDOUS power in a 1-hop (no intermediary) peer to peer network with no "sponsoring" company. The political pressure attack surface is basically zero. Its unfortunate that certain people can't see the wisdom of reasonable scaling until we are certain that these issues work themselves out in a manner the protects an individual's inalienable right to property and the transactions that implies. I'm agreeing with you that the stress test was in general a success. I mean some people had 12-14 hour txn waits (according to reddit posts), but in theory wallets will now be changed to suggest fees dynamically. But this was a very static situation -- the spammer was issuing txns at a well known fee so it was easy to outbid him (if you read reddit and knew what was going on, which you know most casual users won't do). But the the point of the spammer was to fill blocks, NOT to get his txns IN a block. However, the situation will be VERY different when there is sustained 110% demand by people who need their txns in a block.
|
|
|
|
Melbustus
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1722
Merit: 1004
|
|
July 12, 2015, 04:07:51 AM |
|
... EDIT: Great minds think alike: Yes, a fee market was indeed "intended". As was a high-volume of microtransactions: ... We can't hope to guess at what anyone from back then would think about the current state of the world, though we do know that e.g. the current mining ecosystem would have been regarded as a system failure from the original precepts; and we also know that decentralization and autonomy were principle motivations for the creation of the system in the first place. ...
Perhaps you're forgetting the below, but we do have a number of Satoshi quotes that are relevant to today's discussion: Right. Otherwise we couldn't have a finite limit of 21 million coins, because there would always need to be some minimum reward for generating. In a few decades when the reward gets too small, the transaction fee will become the main compensation for nodes. I'm sure that in 20 years there will either be very large transaction volume or no volume.
(emphasis added) ... While I don't think Bitcoin is practical for smaller micropayments right now, it will eventually be as storage and bandwidth costs continue to fall. If Bitcoin catches on on a big scale, it may already be the case by that time. Another way they can become more practical is if I implement client-only mode and the number of network nodes consolidates into a smaller number of professional server farms. Whatever size micropayments you need will eventually be practical. I think in 5 or 10 years, the bandwidth and storage will seem trivial. ...
(emphasis added) Long before the network gets anywhere near as large as that, it would be safe for users to use Simplified Payment Verification (section to check for double spending, which only requires having the chain of block headers, or about 12KB per day. Only people trying to create new coins would need to run network nodes. At first, most users would run network nodes, but as the network grows beyond a certain point, it would be left more and more to specialists with server farms of specialized hardware. http://www.mail-archive.com/cryptography%40metzdowd.com/msg09964.html(emphasis added) It can be phased in, like:
if (blocknumber > 115000) maxblocksize = largerlimit
It can start being in versions way ahead, so by the time it reaches that block number and goes into effect, the older versions that don't have it are already obsolete.
When we're near the cutoff block number, I can put an alert to old versions to make sure they know they have to upgrade.
I read these in aggregate to indicate that Satoshi thought Bitcoin should eventually support a high number of transactions (even very low "micro" transactions), and that consolidation of network resources (nodes and miners) was both inevitable and workable in order to achieve that *primary* goal of high-adoption rate and a large number of on-chain transactions. I'm not saying with any absolute that Satoshi was right (though I tend to think he was), but if we're going to be discussing "original precepts", let's look at the relevant statements.
|
Bitcoin is the first monetary system to credibly offer perfect information to all economic participants.
|
|
|
iCEBREAKER
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2156
Merit: 1072
Crypto is the separation of Power and State.
|
|
July 12, 2015, 05:55:01 AM |
|
I admire how you care about poor africans who cannot afford to pay 0.001BTC for transaction while "you"(your white horse) stole 3,000 BTC into your pocket.
?? You're confusing me with Cypherdoc and claims on hashfast? @iCEBREAKER: while its true of course that black markets have a high margin and so therefore can handle high transaction fees, my honest hope for Bitcoin is that it allows every person to "be their own bank". I hope that it is not solely useful as currency of choice for criminal activity due to high transaction fees. That betrays the promise of crypto-currency (IMHO) RE: sidechains and Lightning -- these are vaporware right now, and I have seen too many 100million dollar startups fail due to a great vaporware story. Products have failed because they promise V2 with all these features, so people choose to wait rather than buy V1. But if you rewind this thread about 6 months you'll see that I was an avid supporter sidechains and lightning. Even if the technical details are a slam-dunk, the organizational details may be problematic. We don't know if individual companies will be backing these functions and therefore be pressure points and behave just like CoinCafe has done for the completely legal action of posting an ad on Backpage -- that is, block it due to fear of litigation. There is TREMENDOUS power in a 1-hop (no intermediary) peer to peer network with no "sponsoring" company. The political pressure attack surface is basically zero. Its unfortunate that certain people can't see the wisdom of reasonable scaling until we are certain that these issues work themselves out in a manner the protects an individual's inalienable right to property and the transactions that implies. I'm agreeing with you that the stress test was in general a success. I mean some people had 12-14 hour txn waits (according to reddit posts), but in theory wallets will now be changed to suggest fees dynamically. But this was a very static situation -- the spammer was issuing txns at a well known fee so it was easy to outbid him (if you read reddit and knew what was going on, which you know most casual users won't do). But the the point of the spammer was to fill blocks, NOT to get his txns IN a block. However, the situation will be VERY different when there is sustained 110% demand by people who need their txns in a block. Thanks for considerate and intelligent reply. I don't know how anyone could possibly confuse you with the increasingly unstable Frappuccino_Doc of late. Please don't cite "Reddit posts" as proof any tx with a competitive fee failed to be given proper priority. Blocktrail or it didn't happen. Wallets are starting to support RBF and dynamic fees, so stuck payments shouldn't be an issue in the future. Sidechains and Lightning (spelled it correctly this time!) are coming along nicely: https://github.com/ElementsProject/lightninghttps://github.com/ElementsProject/elementsJR's profound "only black markets matter" thesis is greatly enhanced by the fact that "Being your own bank" is considered a criminal activity.
|
██████████ ██████████████████ ██████████████████████ ██████████████████████████ ████████████████████████████ ██████████████████████████████ ████████████████████████████████ ████████████████████████████████ ██████████████████████████████████ ██████████████████████████████████ ██████████████████████████████████ ██████████████████████████████████ ██████████████████████████████████ ████████████████████████████████ ██████████████ ██████████████ ████████████████████████████ ██████████████████████████ ██████████████████████ ██████████████████ ██████████ Monero
|
| "The difference between bad and well-developed digital cash will determine whether we have a dictatorship or a real democracy." David Chaum 1996 "Fungibility provides privacy as a side effect." Adam Back 2014
|
| | |
|
|
|
molecular
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2772
Merit: 1019
|
|
July 12, 2015, 12:46:32 PM |
|
The only reason we have to talk about spam is because the resource allocation of network bandwidth and storage isn't handled very well.
Nobody is ever going to agree on what is or is not spam, so a more productive solution is to make whatever changes to the network are needed to ensure that everybody pays for what they use.
Once that condition is achieved, it doesn't matter how many resources people use.
Edit: Agree, and... Someone just out of nowhere defined what is spam, and entered it into the code. But we have seen earlier, that not all miners care about that. It is really impossible to say, some people need small amounts. It is best that there is no agreement. Again, trust the market, don't fight it. It is natural, it comes from the human in each individual. Currently we have a sort of default fee, and the only resource counted is TX size. The spam consumes also a different resource, the UXTO data set. To charge for that resource, it might take some sort of incremental fee increase for outputs > inputs? Sounds like a good idea. Also something miners can simply do w/o protocol permission. I personally perceive UTXO bloat as being much worse than blockchain bloat. *looks at his electrum-server*
|
PGP key molecular F9B70769 fingerprint 9CDD C0D3 20F8 279F 6BE0 3F39 FC49 2362 F9B7 0769
|
|
|
Odalv
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1414
Merit: 1000
|
|
July 12, 2015, 10:22:18 PM |
|
I admire how you care about poor africans who cannot afford to pay 0.001BTC for transaction while "you"(your white horse) stole 3,000 BTC into your pocket.
?? You're confusing me with Cypherdoc and claims on hashfast? No, I only had a feeling that you support cypherdoc's ideas.
|
|
|
|
Odalv
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1414
Merit: 1000
|
|
July 12, 2015, 10:51:13 PM |
|
i'll be offline for the next 3d camping. have fun with your new Master "iCEBlow" et al!
2d without your FUD and bitcoin is at $318. BOO!!!
|
|
|
|
Cconvert2G36
|
|
July 12, 2015, 11:04:13 PM |
|
Right. Otherwise we couldn't have a finite limit of 21 million coins, because there would always need to be some minimum reward for generating. In a few decades when the reward gets too small, the transaction fee will become the main compensation for nodes. I'm sure that in 20 years there will either be very large transaction volume or no volume.
(emphasis added) ... While I don't think Bitcoin is practical for smaller micropayments right now, it will eventually be as storage and bandwidth costs continue to fall. If Bitcoin catches on on a big scale, it may already be the case by that time. Another way they can become more practical is if I implement client-only mode and the number of network nodes consolidates into a smaller number of professional server farms. Whatever size micropayments you need will eventually be practical. I think in 5 or 10 years, the bandwidth and storage will seem trivial. ...
(emphasis added) Long before the network gets anywhere near as large as that, it would be safe for users to use Simplified Payment Verification (section to check for double spending, which only requires having the chain of block headers, or about 12KB per day. Only people trying to create new coins would need to run network nodes. At first, most users would run network nodes, but as the network grows beyond a certain point, it would be left more and more to specialists with server farms of specialized hardware. http://www.mail-archive.com/cryptography%40metzdowd.com/msg09964.html(emphasis added) It can be phased in, like:
if (blocknumber > 115000) maxblocksize = largerlimit
It can start being in versions way ahead, so by the time it reaches that block number and goes into effect, the older versions that don't have it are already obsolete.
When we're near the cutoff block number, I can put an alert to old versions to make sure they know they have to upgrade.
A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System*
*A limit of less than three transactions per second occurring on planet earth may apply.
|
|
|
|
thezerg
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1246
Merit: 1010
|
|
July 13, 2015, 12:06:42 AM |
|
I admire how you care about poor africans who cannot afford to pay 0.001BTC for transaction while "you"(your white horse) stole 3,000 BTC into your pocket.
?? You're confusing me with Cypherdoc and claims on hashfast? No, I only had a feeling that you support cypherdoc's ideas. I support Satoshi's ideas.
|
|
|
|
Peter R
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1162
Merit: 1007
|
|
July 13, 2015, 05:10:15 AM Last edit: July 13, 2015, 06:06:34 AM by Peter R |
|
The 7-day moving average of the blocksize is now in the red zone--six months ahead of schedule.
|
|
|
|
iCEBREAKER
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2156
Merit: 1072
Crypto is the separation of Power and State.
|
|
July 13, 2015, 05:39:18 AM |
|
The 7-day moving average of the blocksize is now in the red zone--six months ahead of schedule.
If we rephrase your statement to replace the alarmist "red zone" nonsense with something less panicky and more practical, we get: A surge in transaction volume has led to a healthy fee market--six months ahead of schedule.
|
██████████ ██████████████████ ██████████████████████ ██████████████████████████ ████████████████████████████ ██████████████████████████████ ████████████████████████████████ ████████████████████████████████ ██████████████████████████████████ ██████████████████████████████████ ██████████████████████████████████ ██████████████████████████████████ ██████████████████████████████████ ████████████████████████████████ ██████████████ ██████████████ ████████████████████████████ ██████████████████████████ ██████████████████████ ██████████████████ ██████████ Monero
|
| "The difference between bad and well-developed digital cash will determine whether we have a dictatorship or a real democracy." David Chaum 1996 "Fungibility provides privacy as a side effect." Adam Back 2014
|
| | |
|
|
|
NewLiberty
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1204
Merit: 1002
Gresham's Lawyer
|
|
July 13, 2015, 06:07:53 AM |
|
If we rephrase your statement to replace the alarmist "red zone" nonsense with something less panicky and more practical, we get:
A surge in transaction volume has led to a healthy fee market--six months ahead of schedule.
The 'red zone' coincides with an increase in hash rate and price. Is there a metric for user frustration more useful than percentage of blocks being full? It might be hard to find a less useful one.
|
|
|
|
Zarathustra
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1162
Merit: 1004
|
|
July 13, 2015, 07:37:40 AM |
|
I will delete this post. This is perhaps my last FYI to try to help the fools here. The catalysts. Some years ago I independently happenstanced on (discovered) Martin Armstrong's 78.9 (79) year cycle of real estate (which I also correlated to technological unemployment cycles). So when I later discovered Armstrong's cycle models and that he had back tested them to the Athenian empire and before (even as far back as Mesopotamia), I'm keen to accept that such a cycle does exist. Armstrong is the largest hedge fund manager in history, formerly managing $3 trillion in Japanese sovereign funds before he got unintentionally entangled in the USA bankster's involved in the LTCM and Russian bonds scam via Republic bank which involved some of the funds he was managing. It is with this wealth that he compiled the massive $billion (in today's money) historical economics and natural phenomenon database that enable his supercomputer system to correlate and find these patterns and repeating cycles.
It is with this system that he has been accurately predicting everything since the 1980s without fail. In fact, I have predicted the past 4 major moves in the Bitcoin price employing his model, including my recent prediction in May that BTC would rise to $315 in June and July, then crash back down to below $150 for the Octoberish bottom.
This is it folks. Cash is king. Get out while you still can. This may be my last warning. Your prediction will be wrong.
|
|
|
|
solex
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1078
Merit: 1006
100 satoshis -> ISO code
|
|
July 13, 2015, 07:39:50 AM |
|
The 7-day moving average of the blocksize is now in the red zone--six months ahead of schedule. Indeed. And unfortunately, the sheer resilience of the bitcoin network in the face of a self-imposed handicap against smooth management of traffic peaks, has given oxygen to the 1MBers. They believe that bitcoin users having to put a higher fee than a spammer's known low-ball fee level is some kind of fee-market! (Matonis is clueless to claim there is a fee-market - though my estimation of him is now down to zero as he talks about monkeying with the 21M limit). We don't have a real fee market, just one of general policy, it is pure luck that the spammer conducted his attack when the blocks were 40% full, and did not have enough money to hit out a range of higher fees that would have really disrupted the users. So, Wladimir has pushed out the v0.11 release (full of magnificent stuff) but missing the one change more important than all the others put together: a fix like BIPs 100 & 101. Unless v0.12 comes out soon with one of these fixes then serious delays driving thousands of users away from Bitcoin are inevitable by the end of this year. All the miners are producing 900+KB blocks now. This is an alarm going off. Even Gavin's earliest proposed trigger date of Jan 1st, 2016 looks iffy now.
|
|
|
|
RAJSALLIN
|
|
July 13, 2015, 11:06:42 AM |
|
I will delete this post. This is perhaps my last FYI to try to help the fools here. The catalysts. Some years ago I independently happenstanced on (discovered) Martin Armstrong's 78.9 (79) year cycle of real estate (which I also correlated to technological unemployment cycles). So when I later discovered Armstrong's cycle models and that he had back tested them to the Athenian empire and before (even as far back as Mesopotamia), I'm keen to accept that such a cycle does exist. Armstrong is the largest hedge fund manager in history, formerly managing $3 trillion in Japanese sovereign funds before he got unintentionally entangled in the USA bankster's involved in the LTCM and Russian bonds scam via Republic bank which involved some of the funds he was managing. It is with this wealth that he compiled the massive $billion (in today's money) historical economics and natural phenomenon database that enable his supercomputer system to correlate and find these patterns and repeating cycles.
It is with this system that he has been accurately predicting everything since the 1980s without fail. In fact, I have predicted the past 4 major moves in the Bitcoin price employing his model, including my recent prediction in May that BTC would rise to $315 in June and July, then crash back down to below $150 for the Octoberish bottom.
This is it folks. Cash is king. Get out while you still can. This may be my last warning. Your prediction will be wrong. And I think his prediction will be correct. Anonymint has pin pointed the last 2 years or so of bitcoin movement better than anyone I know on this forum. With his help I sold before the dip to $150 and re-bought and sold again yesterday at $315. I think he should get much more credit. His macro economic predictions are probably also going to be correct. On the basis of Armstrongs models (who has been consistently correct for decades) I think it is very likely we have some very dark times ahead.
|
|
|
|
iCEBREAKER
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2156
Merit: 1072
Crypto is the separation of Power and State.
|
|
July 13, 2015, 03:05:13 PM |
|
If we rephrase your statement to replace the alarmist "red zone" nonsense with something less panicky and more practical, we get:
A surge in transaction volume has led to a healthy fee market--six months ahead of schedule.
The 'red zone' coincides with an increase in hash rate and price. Is there a metric for user frustration more useful than percentage of blocks being full? It might be hard to find a less useful one. The 'red zone' coincides with a Transaction Fee Market Developing Amid A Surge in Transaction Volume. The 'red zone' coincides with Bitcoin, quietly and without much hype, starting to work as it was intended to. User frustration? Depends on the user in question. Users attempting to DOS the network with crapfloods have been frustrated. Users attempting to use the frustrated crapflooding efforts to justify pushing through larger blocks have also been frustrated. As gmax quipped, "the attack is actually much less effective against the network itself than it is against the forums." Users sending tx with appropriately competitive fees (IE normal people) have not been frustrated.
|
██████████ ██████████████████ ██████████████████████ ██████████████████████████ ████████████████████████████ ██████████████████████████████ ████████████████████████████████ ████████████████████████████████ ██████████████████████████████████ ██████████████████████████████████ ██████████████████████████████████ ██████████████████████████████████ ██████████████████████████████████ ████████████████████████████████ ██████████████ ██████████████ ████████████████████████████ ██████████████████████████ ██████████████████████ ██████████████████ ██████████ Monero
|
| "The difference between bad and well-developed digital cash will determine whether we have a dictatorship or a real democracy." David Chaum 1996 "Fungibility provides privacy as a side effect." Adam Back 2014
|
| | |
|
|
|
NewLiberty
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1204
Merit: 1002
Gresham's Lawyer
|
|
July 13, 2015, 03:57:30 PM |
|
As gmax quipped, "the attack is actually much less effective against the network itself than it is against the forums."
Users sending tx with appropriately competitive fees (IE normal people) have not been frustrated.
Hilarious, I'd missed this, have a link?
|
|
|
|
|
Zangelbert Bingledack
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1036
Merit: 1000
|
|
July 13, 2015, 08:30:42 PM |
|
I think the bull run has started and will go quite a lot beyond 300. Then I see two scenarios: 1) This is like 2012 and the price merely doubles/triples or so and then hangs fairly steady for quite a few more months, maybe gets temporarily beaten down during the so-called "2015.75" flight to safety ( like gold did in 2008), finally getting into the 2013-style giant surge as we approach next year's halving. 2) This is like early 2013 and a giant rise is in progress right now, hopefully getting into something resembling that nice early-2013 steady(ish) three-week doubling time exponential growth soon, and running between 50x and 500x to the peak. I think Greece was merely the excuse, though it can add to the fire.
|
|
|
|
Odalv
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1414
Merit: 1000
|
|
July 13, 2015, 09:07:58 PM |
|
I support Satoshi's ideas.
I have never heard that Satoshi propose exponential growth of block. (doubling size every 2 years)
|
|
|
|
|