Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[smoothie]

The 7-day moving average of the blocksize is now in the red zone--six months ahead of schedule.

Where can I gain access to this chart as it is updated?

[1713555970]

1713555970

[1713555970]

1713555970

[1713555970]

1713555970

[1713555970]

1713555970

[Peter R]

The 7-day moving average of the blocksize is now in the red zone--six months ahead of schedule.

Where can I gain access to this chart as it is updated?

You'd have to hack my laptop  Actually, just post a request here or PM me and I'll try to upload an updated version.  I use the 7-day moving average, so it responds slow to changes.    

[smoothie]

The 7-day moving average of the blocksize is now in the red zone--six months ahead of schedule.

Where can I gain access to this chart as it is updated?

You'd have to hack my laptop  Actually, just post a request here or PM me and I'll try to upload an updated version.  I use the 7-day moving average, so it responds slow to changes.    

Got it.  Will make a request.

[BldSwtTrs]

Yes, but additional production is always produced via credit. A system without credit/debt does not need to grow and therefore it doesn't grow. Rain forest people are not forced to increase their 'output'. Their output does not grow in thousand years. Only nationalized people are forced to produce surplus, because they are forced to pay tribute. That's the root of credit/debt: organized violence (collectivism/society).

I am sorry but that's some weird, utterly false statements.

If I am owner of my production I will produce beyond my consumption needs (that's called capital accumulation) to improve my standard of living in the future, even if I have no debt. The capital accumulation will enhance my productivity and thus allow me to produce more output.

The output of rain forest people doesn't grow because their culture haven't evolved private property rules, it is no related to debt.

[cypherdoc]

Now, for the first time ever, people are starting to have to think about abandoning Mycelium, probably the most popular android wallet,  because core dev refuses to address the spam attack with bigger blocks.

Great job ICBLow!

[brg444]

Now, for the first time ever, people are starting to have to think about abandoning Mycelium, probably the most popular android wallet,  because core dev refuses to address the spam attack with bigger blocks.

Great job ICBLow!

Will you please spare us your brainless FUD?

This is why people cannot take you seriously.

Mycelium fucked up. That's all there is to it.

[justusranvier]

The output of rain forest people doesn't grow because their culture haven't evolved private property rules, it is no related to debt.

There are a few prerequisites needed before people can start producing economic surplus.

Tribal people in rain forests haven't yet figured out how to not routinely murder each other, so learning how to not respect property is still a ways off.

[cypherdoc]

here's Tom Harding's reply on bitcoin-dev to the double spends being inflicted on the 0confs in the bloated mempools as a result of the full blocks.

https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org/msg00500.html:

On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 07:35:21AM -0700, Tom Harding via bitcoin-dev wrote:
>
> You perform a valuable service with your demonstration, but you
> neglected to include the txid's to show that you actually did it.
 
> Your advice is must-follow for anyone relying on an unconfirmed tx: it
> must pay a good fee and be highly relayable/minable.

Actually, I was looking at what I believe was (part of?) this attack
yesterday in the logs on my full-RBF nodes and the txs involved *did*
have good fees and were highly relayable/minable - the double-spent txs
had near 100% propagation on blockchain.info (who has unfortunately
purged the relevant data already)

Shapeshift.io depends on Blockcypher's "confidence factor" model(1)
under the hood - yet another one of those sybil attacking network
monitoring things - to estimate tx confirmation probability by looking
at the % of nodes a tx has propagated too. But miners frequently use
customized Bitcoin Core codebases that don't follow normal policies, so
those measurements don't actually tell you what you need to know.

hapeshift confirmed(2) the attack - confirming that they disabled
unconfirmed tx acceptance - said they're going to "improve" their
system... It'll be interesting to see what that actually entails.

1) https://medium.com/blockcypher-blog/from-zero-to-hero-bitcoin-transactions-in-8-seconds-7c9edcb3b734
2) https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3ddkhy/bitcoindev_significant_losses_by_doublespending/ct468p7

-- 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org 000000000000000010bf087ed645cba129e2523930d5cde636ddbae9e03aef9c

[cypherdoc]

Now, for the first time ever, people are starting to have to think about abandoning Mycelium, probably the most popular android wallet,  because core dev refuses to address the spam attack with bigger blocks.

Great job ICBLow!

Will you please spare us your brainless FUD?

This is why people cannot take you seriously.

Mycelium fucked up. That's all there is to it.

it's idiots like you that will get Bitcoin into trouble.  i can't help you if you don't understand the technicals behind what is going on.  bigger blocks would allow clearing of the mempool:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3db7qr/mycelium_servers_down/ct3mbjj

[cypherdoc]

oh.

Gold collapsing.  Bitcoin UP.

[cypherdoc]

here's Gavin this morning on dynamic block size:

@flix1 : dynamic limits are harder to implement-- I volunteered to help @jgarzik implement BIP100, and when diving into actually coding it up, the combination of headers-first and out-of-order block fetching makes any dynamic limit based on previous block sizes or votes in coinbase transactions non-trivial because the max block size may not be known when the block data is received.

That's not a show-stopper problem: a 'maximum feasible block size' could be used for initial denial-of-service checks on 'block' message size based on the block height, with a tighter check on size done when all previous blocks have been downloaded and validated and the block is added to the chain.

But it is much simpler if the max size is a pure function based on data in the block header.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

[iCEBREAKER]

Now, for the first time ever, people are starting to have to think about abandoning Mycelium, probably the most popular android wallet,  because core dev refuses to address the spam attack with bigger blocks.

Great job ICBLow!

Will you please spare us your brainless FUD?

This is why people cannot take you seriously.

Mycelium fucked up. That's all there is to it.

Have mercy on poor befuddled old Frap.doc.

So paltry is his understanding of Bitcoin technology, he believes Mycelium's issues in some way supervene upon Bitcoin itself!

So great is his ignorance of Bitcoin affairs, he fails to notice core devs addressing the spam attack on several fronts, including community reach-out to educate on best practices, code improvements/optimizations, and BIP submissions addressing his beloved 'bigger blocks.'

We should feel sorry for him, instead of committing cruelty to dumb animals.

[brg444]

Now, for the first time ever, people are starting to have to think about abandoning Mycelium, probably the most popular android wallet,  because core dev refuses to address the spam attack with bigger blocks.

Great job ICBLow!

Will you please spare us your brainless FUD?

This is why people cannot take you seriously.

Mycelium fucked up. That's all there is to it.

it's idiots like you that will get Bitcoin into trouble.  i can't help you if you don't understand the technicals behind what is going on.  bigger blocks would allow clearing of the mempool:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3db7qr/mycelium_servers_down/ct3mbjj

Then why aren't every nodes down?

The problem is clearly shoddy backend implementation on Mycelium part, as is clearly explained in the reddit thread you have linked by Mycelium devs themselves. Moreover, any user not relying on outdate wallet models with centralized server dependent on 3!!! nodes is not experiencing any of these problems.

Bitcoin isn't to blame for amateur software. Everytime you cling on to any minor, user-defined issue to promote your FUD makes you look more pathetic and desperate.

[cypherdoc]

Now, for the first time ever, people are starting to have to think about abandoning Mycelium, probably the most popular android wallet,  because core dev refuses to address the spam attack with bigger blocks.

Great job ICBLow!

Will you please spare us your brainless FUD?

This is why people cannot take you seriously.

Mycelium fucked up. That's all there is to it.

Have mercy on poor befuddled old Frap.doc.

So paltry is his understanding of Bitcoin technology, he believes Mycelium's issues in some way supervene upon Bitcoin itself!

So great is his ignorance of Bitcoin affairs, he fails to notice core devs addressing the spam attack on several fronts, including community reach-out to educate on best practices, code improvements/optimizations, and BIP submissions addressing his beloved 'bigger blocks.'

We should feel sorry for him, instead of committing cruelty to dumb animals.

thank you for paying me such great homage.

it's a flattering tribute when thug trolls like you follow me around the forums trying so hard to counter my messages.  you may kiss my feet now.

and yes, keep pushing this thread up to the top so everyone can read what i write while having you on ignore.

[cypherdoc]

Now, for the first time ever, people are starting to have to think about abandoning Mycelium, probably the most popular android wallet,  because core dev refuses to address the spam attack with bigger blocks.

Great job ICBLow!

Will you please spare us your brainless FUD?

This is why people cannot take you seriously.

Mycelium fucked up. That's all there is to it.

it's idiots like you that will get Bitcoin into trouble.  i can't help you if you don't understand the technicals behind what is going on.  bigger blocks would allow clearing of the mempool:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3db7qr/mycelium_servers_down/ct3mbjj

Then why aren't every nodes down?

The problem is clearly shoddy backend implementation on Mycelium part, as is clearly explained in the reddit thread you have linked by Mycelium devs themselves. Moreover, any user not relying on outdate wallet models with centralized server dependent on 3!!! nodes is not experiencing any of these problems.

Bitcoin isn't to blame for amateur software. Everytime you cling on to any minor, user-defined issue to promote your FUD makes you look more pathetic and desperate.

Mycelium has been the most popular of all the android wallets.  ignoramus's like you are quick to blame them when in fact all the congestion problems are a result of full blocks and bloated mempools as a result of false "fee market" delusions from core dev worshippers like you.

let's flip this around.  just what kinda trouble would actually make you agree that blocks are too small?  i suspect there aren't any that you would dare to admit to since you are stuck on your position no_matter_what.

let me remind everybody what Bitcoin was meant to be:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=68655.msg11625671#msg11625671

[brg444]

Now, for the first time ever, people are starting to have to think about abandoning Mycelium, probably the most popular android wallet,  because core dev refuses to address the spam attack with bigger blocks.

Great job ICBLow!

Will you please spare us your brainless FUD?

This is why people cannot take you seriously.

Mycelium fucked up. That's all there is to it.

it's idiots like you that will get Bitcoin into trouble.  i can't help you if you don't understand the technicals behind what is going on.  bigger blocks would allow clearing of the mempool:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3db7qr/mycelium_servers_down/ct3mbjj

Then why aren't every nodes down?

The problem is clearly shoddy backend implementation on Mycelium part, as is clearly explained in the reddit thread you have linked by Mycelium devs themselves. Moreover, any user not relying on outdate wallet models with centralized server dependent on 3!!! nodes is not experiencing any of these problems.

Bitcoin isn't to blame for amateur software. Everytime you cling on to any minor, user-defined issue to promote your FUD makes you look more pathetic and desperate.

Mycelium has been the most popular of all the android wallets.  ignoramus's like you are quick to blame them when in fact all the congestion problems are a result of full blocks and bloated mempools as a result of false "fee market" delusions from core dev worshippers like you.

let's flip this around.  just what kinda trouble would actually make you agree that blocks are too small.  i suspect there aren't any that you would dare to admit to since you are stuck on your position no_matter_what.

let me remind everybody what Bitcoin was meant to be:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=68655.msg11625671#msg11625671

Your ignorance and disingenuity transpires through your tendency to rely on a variety of argumentum ad populum

I don't care if 100% of Bitcoin users use Mycelium it doesn't change the fact that it is amateur software and should be treated as such.

Maybe you should read again ICEBreaker post about supervenience?

[tvbcof]

Now, for the first time ever, people are starting to have to think about abandoning Mycelium, probably the most popular android wallet,  because core dev refuses to address the spam attack with bigger blocks.

Great job ICBLow!

Will you please spare us your brainless FUD?

This is why people cannot take you seriously.

Mycelium fucked up. That's all there is to it.

Think of finally starting to develop a transaction fee market as Tough Actin' Tinactin for some of the maladies that have increasingly infected Bitcoin.

If Mycelium cannot handle Bitcoin, they should look into a dedicated pegged sidechain which functions in the way they need it do in order to make their software work.  Sounds like they already have a decent sized userbase.

[cypherdoc]

valuable perspective on why 0confs have not been a problem until now that we have full blocks and bloated mempools.  now, businesses like his have to scramble for work arounds and core dev just keeps compensating for the fundamental mistake of not removing the 1MB choke.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3ddkhy/bitcoindev_significant_losses_by_doublespending/ct474kh

[cypherdoc]

Now, for the first time ever, people are starting to have to think about abandoning Mycelium, probably the most popular android wallet,  because core dev refuses to address the spam attack with bigger blocks.

Great job ICBLow!

Will you please spare us your brainless FUD?

This is why people cannot take you seriously.

Mycelium fucked up. That's all there is to it.

it's idiots like you that will get Bitcoin into trouble.  i can't help you if you don't understand the technicals behind what is going on.  bigger blocks would allow clearing of the mempool:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3db7qr/mycelium_servers_down/ct3mbjj

Then why aren't every nodes down?

The problem is clearly shoddy backend implementation on Mycelium part, as is clearly explained in the reddit thread you have linked by Mycelium devs themselves. Moreover, any user not relying on outdate wallet models with centralized server dependent on 3!!! nodes is not experiencing any of these problems.

Bitcoin isn't to blame for amateur software. Everytime you cling on to any minor, user-defined issue to promote your FUD makes you look more pathetic and desperate.

Mycelium has been the most popular of all the android wallets.  ignoramus's like you are quick to blame them when in fact all the congestion problems are a result of full blocks and bloated mempools as a result of false "fee market" delusions from core dev worshippers like you.

let's flip this around.  just what kinda trouble would actually make you agree that blocks are too small.  i suspect there aren't any that you would dare to admit to since you are stuck on your position no_matter_what.

let me remind everybody what Bitcoin was meant to be:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=68655.msg11625671#msg11625671

Your ignorance and disingenuity transpires through your tendency to rely on a variety of argumentum ad populum

I don't care if 100% of Bitcoin users use Mycelium it doesn't change the fact that it is amateur software and should be treated as such.

Maybe you should read again ICEBreaker post about supervenience?

spoken like a true noob unfamiliar with the history and evolution of the space.

Mycelium, once Bitcoin Spinner, has been a MAJOR force in bringing Bitcoin to the masses thru a highly usable and clever programming team.  w/o them, Bitcoin would not be what it is today in terms of how far along we've progressed.  you're demonstrating a classic case of "everyone else is the problem but not me".  the damage to new user adoption from this problem of double spending cannot be measured. 

it's too bad your head is up your ass.

[cypherdoc]

what we're witnessing is Blockstream core dev forcing Bitcoin into their vision of what it should be.  not Satoshi's vision. 

nor the vast majority of the community's vision.