➫ ➬ ➫ ➬ LUCKYB.IT Classic ★★★ the oldest Bitcoin on-chain game ★★★

[sbankerdemon]

Hi when is your website coming back? Any timeline?

[1715374107]

1715374107

[1715374107]

1715374107

[1715374107]

1715374107

[1715374107]

1715374107

[LuckyBitSupport]

Hi when is your website coming back? Any timeline?

We're aiming at Monday, but there is no certainty.

[sbankerdemon]

Hi when is your website coming back? Any timeline?

We're aiming at Monday, but there is no certainty.

What actually the problem is? Unconfirmed bet? Due to stress test?

[LuckyBitSupport]

Hi when is your website coming back? Any timeline?

We're aiming at Monday, but there is no certainty.

What actually the problem is? Unconfirmed bet? Due to stress test?

The stress test has created a new environment on the network, with new yet unseen technical challenges. We want to deal with these challenges properly before re-opening.

[sbankerdemon]

Ok hope to see you back soon

[BrianM]

The stress test has created a new environment on the network, with new yet unseen technical challenges. We want to deal with these challenges properly before re-opening.

I don't quite get it. What is the purpose of that stress test, and who is doing it? Read a lot of FUD here on the forum not sure what to belive. I trust you guys more that random "experts". What is it all about?

[sbankerdemon]

The stress test has created a new environment on the network, with new yet unseen technical challenges. We want to deal with these challenges properly before re-opening.

I don't quite get it. What is the purpose of that stress test, and who is doing it? Read a lot of FUD here on the forum not sure what to belive. I trust you guys more that random "experts". What is it all about?

Yes I would also like to know whyis this stress test being done. And if block size is increased by devs what will be the benifit to spammers and will there be any negative effect to us users?

[RHavar]

Yes I would also like to know whyis this stress test being done. And if block size is increased by devs what will be the benifit to spammers and will there be any negative effect to us users?

Probably to prove how easy/cheap it is to disrupt the bitcoin system. However when all is said and done, we should have a much more robust ecosystem (child pays for parents, replace by fees, dynamic fees, mempool pruning, dynamic relay fees) and hopefully even bigger blocks (which will make spamming more expensive). In the mean time, there's a fair bit of pain to go around

[LuckyBitSupport]

The stress test has created a new environment on the network, with new yet unseen technical challenges. We want to deal with these challenges properly before re-opening.

I don't quite get it. What is the purpose of that stress test, and who is doing it? Read a lot of FUD here on the forum not sure what to belive. I trust you guys more that random "experts". What is it all about?

Yes I would also like to know whyis this stress test being done.

The entity or entities behind it are not known. Everybody is left speculating.
The term "stress test" is maybe too gentle, some call it a clear DDoS attack on Bitcoin users.
Technically, there are a lot of transactions that remain a long time unconfirmed in memory pools (or would never confirm). Some miners took some measures to help fire fighting, but the results is that the propagation of transactions (not only their confirmation) has been affected, too. We intend to right a complete write-up of the issues that are affecting directly business like us, after we'll have open again.

And if block size is increased by devs what will be the benifit to spammers and will there be any negative effect to us users?

There will be no benefit to spammers. If the block size is increased X times, in order to spam as they are doing now, they'll have to spend X times the money they are spending now.

The effect on users of raising the block limit is controversial. At the moment, larger blocks would nullify the spamming consequences and the network would behave as it was before. (assuming the spam attack would be as it today, and not performed at a larger scale too). On a long term perspective, pretty much everybody agrees we will need larger blocks, but by how much, when and how, is a debate still happening that doesn't seem to come to a shared agreement.

[Revelation Machine]

The effect on users of raising the block limit is controversial. At the moment, larger blocks would nullify the spamming consequences and the network would behave as it was before. (assuming the spam attack would be as it today, and not performed at a larger scale too). On a long term perspective, pretty much everybody agrees we will need larger blocks, but by how much, when and how, is a debate still happening that doesn't seem to come to a shared agreement.

For a regular user, what difference would larger blocks have compared to smaller blocks (or regular blocks...whatever the blocks are now)?  More time for transactions to confirm?  Higher fees needed?

[carlaonfire]

Life without luckybit; survivor manual for day one:



I send my best wishes and all the luck to Admins for fixing this.

I'm trying!! trying and failing!

[aniglo]

LB Micro is nice to kill time when LB is off. But chat is missing.

yes true...realy i very miss chat LB...and all users...

[LuckyBitSupport]

The effect on users of raising the block limit is controversial. At the moment, larger blocks would nullify the spamming consequences and the network would behave as it was before. (assuming the spam attack would be as it today, and not performed at a larger scale too). On a long term perspective, pretty much everybody agrees we will need larger blocks, but by how much, when and how, is a debate still happening that doesn't seem to come to a shared agreement.

For a regular user, what difference would larger blocks have compared to smaller blocks (or regular blocks...whatever the blocks are now)?  More time for transactions to confirm?  Higher fees needed?

You must think of the problem differently: what will happen if Bitcoin usage keeps growing?

If you want to keep the feeling that user have nowadays in the future, larger blocks will help.
If we keep the same block size, in the future the fees will be higher, and the confirmation time will depend on the fees paid (large fees = confirm quickly like today, low fee = confirm slowly or even never).

If you think of the problem this way, you'll realize that making blocks larger is not the biggest change between the two options. It's the other one, keeping the block as it is, that will be the biggest change for the users.

[sbankerdemon]

So what best in your opinion? larger blocks size or keeping it same?

[lottery248]

for "create your own game", you should open more winners so that more high/low rollers will play.

[sbankerdemon]

for "create your own game", you should open more winners so that more high/low rollers will play.

You mean more promo lines?

[lottery248]

for "create your own game", you should open more winners so that more high/low rollers will play.

You mean more promo lines?

yup

[sbankerdemon]

for "create your own game", you should open more winners so that more high/low rollers will play.

You mean more promo lines?

yup

yes good suggestion more lines more players more options

[deadlyunknown]

for "create your own game", you should open more winners so that more high/low rollers will play.

You mean more promo lines?

yup

Not bad to this suggestion, I like it.
And if admin can implement this, it can either gain more profit or loss.

[lottery248]

for "create your own game", you should open more winners so that more high/low rollers will play.

You mean more promo lines?

yup

Not bad to this suggestion, I like it.
And if admin can implement this, it can either gain more profit or loss.