Dusty
Active Member
- Mar 14, 2016
- 362
- 1,172
I was asking myself the same thing watching that otherwise excellent video (thanks Zanglebert for posting it!).
Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.
- Thread starter cypherdoc
- Start date
My cached conclusion from summertime is that, with the possibility for miners to stop checking witness data in increasing numbers, there becomes an actual role for non-mining full clients to call this behavior out. It's Core forcing its own mistaken "full nodes" model into existence. I may have failed to update something: can non-miners really do anything here? (Not meaning as relays; I recall something erroneous about relays mentioned in the video.)
Maybe it is not for calling the miners out but for keeping the witness data in the first place.
If there is no economic incentive for miners to validate the witness data then they will not even download or store it.
If you still want to be able to verify the witness data you will need to rely on well-meaning volunteers (as jstolfi calls non-mining node operators) to store and provide the witness data.
[doublepost=1514368022][/doublepost]Mr. Scatman's Bitcoin Cash dragon slayer.
If there is no economic incentive for miners to validate the witness data then they will not even download or store it.
If you still want to be able to verify the witness data you will need to rely on well-meaning volunteers (as jstolfi calls non-mining node operators) to store and provide the witness data.
[doublepost=1514368022][/doublepost]Mr. Scatman's Bitcoin Cash dragon slayer.
Now that Christmas is behind us we can concentrate on the next holiday.
Happy new year to everyone and many more Bitcoin Cash success stories in 2018.
Happy new year to everyone and many more Bitcoin Cash success stories in 2018.
Last edited:
Christoph Bergmann
Active Member
If you just have mining nodes and a large number of light / spv nodes, the bandwidth requirement for mining nodes will be absurdly high. Also you can assume that serving spv nodes will cost resources you need for mining.
@Christoph Bergmann : When/if that becomes a problem (and I suspect the market will rather solve it with branded wallets that then connect to servers owned by whoever runs the branded wallet), paying for full node services with a micropayment channel could be a great option.
@awemany WRT paying non mining full nodes for relaying/validating txns: this is something that @Justus Ranvier proposed a long time ago.
The articles where he proposed te idea are not available anymore on the blog platform he used but I seem to recall he used archive.is to backup them.
The articles where he proposed te idea are not available anymore on the blog platform he used but I seem to recall he used archive.is to backup them.
molecular
Active Member
- Aug 31, 2015
- 372
- 1,391
I just love this guy, Cliff High, for his "rational insanity" (I would maybe call it).
He's been predicting (in early Summer 2017, using linguistic statistical analysis (somehow predictive of the future) on data he scrapes from the net) Bitcoin to hit 13380 $ in February 2018.
(link is to where they start talking crypto. The part where he talks about his prediction starts around the 28:30 mark)
Now that BTC has already exceeded that he doesn't backpaddle saying his methodology isn't necessarily accurate on timing like I would've expected. Instead he says Bitcoin price will "have seen 13380 for the last time" in Feb. 2018.
I'm thinking: maybe his prediction was correct after all, but he got the wrong currency and it's really BCH that'll hit 13380 USD in February? ;-) muahahahaa.
He's been predicting (in early Summer 2017, using linguistic statistical analysis (somehow predictive of the future) on data he scrapes from the net) Bitcoin to hit 13380 $ in February 2018.
(link is to where they start talking crypto. The part where he talks about his prediction starts around the 28:30 mark)
Now that BTC has already exceeded that he doesn't backpaddle saying his methodology isn't necessarily accurate on timing like I would've expected. Instead he says Bitcoin price will "have seen 13380 for the last time" in Feb. 2018.
I'm thinking: maybe his prediction was correct after all, but he got the wrong currency and it's really BCH that'll hit 13380 USD in February? ;-) muahahahaa.
molecular
Active Member
- Aug 31, 2015
- 372
- 1,391
merchants (http://keys4coins.com in this case) are starting to pass on the tx-fees they will necessarily need to pay to spend the outputs from customer payments on to those customers: That's the "Surcharge (Bitcoin tx fee)" in the right column (not to be mistaken for the tx fee the customer himself has to pay). Ouch.
BTC is broken.
Roger_Murdock
Active Member
- Dec 17, 2015
- 223
- 1,453
@molecular Wow, that is sad. But of course, it makes perfect sense given the sad state of the BTC network. If the practice becomes more common, companies accepting BTC as payment may also need to add a "Surcharge Surcharge" to cover the "Surcharge" that they'll be charged when they attempt to spend the BTC they've received. And of course, if that practice were to become common...
Honestly, I'm not sure what I find more impressive at this point: (1) how completely broken the BTC network is or (2) the fact that there are still people capable of performing the mental gymnastics required to pretend that BTC isn't completely broken.
It's also kind of amazing how quickly we got here, although in another sense the breaking of Bitcoin BTC took years. It's sort of like the old joke about how one goes bankrupt: "gradually and then suddenly." But it was only a few months ago that small blockers were reassuring us that "transaction fees of a dollar or two are no big deal because Bitcoin isn't meant for buying coffee." Today, BTC is increasingly unusable as a means of paying for anything less expensive than a coffee shop so that rhetoric rings just a teensy bit hollow.
Another thought: it seems to me that one way to understand why the situation deteriorated so quickly is to think about the supply and demand curves for transactions / block space. As BTC has attracted more users over time, the demand curve has shifted to the right. And for the past year or so that rightward-moving demand curve has encountered the vertical line represented by the 1-MB supply quota. That alone would be enough to cause a relatively rapid price rise. What made the situation worse is the fact that we are (or recently were) in the mania phase of a hype cycle, meaning that the demand curve for transactions has been moving rightward faster than normal as new users flood in. And what I think has made the situation even worse than that is my suspicion that the portion of the demand curve that is now intersecting the supply curve is relatively steep representing highly inelastic demand. Why? Because it mostly represents purely speculative use (all other use cases having been rendered infeasible by the current fees) -- and because such use is relatively fee-insensitive. If you're attempting to move tens of thousands of dollars in BTC to an exchange to sell because there's been a huge spike in price, you're not going to care (much) about paying $20 in transaction fees vs. $50 or even $100. What you probably really care about is being confident that your transaction will actually get confirmed in a timely manner. And so you've got a nearly vertical demand curve moving rapidly to the right and intersecting a vertical supply curve. And the result of that is a really nasty exponential growth curve for transaction fees.
The pace at which transaction fees have risen recently is obviously not sustainable indefinitely. So what will keep it from being sustained? One possibility is that the idiotic supply quota on BTC block space will be lifted. Another is that the demand will eventually stop increasing as Bitcoin's increasingly broken functionality causes users to abandon (or never adopt in the the first place) BTC in favor of uncrippled alternatives. (Note that this is not really a desirable scenario for a good whose entire value is based on the network effect.) Or maybe the Lightning Network will be released soon and totally fix everything!
Honestly, I'm not sure what I find more impressive at this point: (1) how completely broken the BTC network is or (2) the fact that there are still people capable of performing the mental gymnastics required to pretend that BTC isn't completely broken.
It's also kind of amazing how quickly we got here, although in another sense the breaking of Bitcoin BTC took years. It's sort of like the old joke about how one goes bankrupt: "gradually and then suddenly." But it was only a few months ago that small blockers were reassuring us that "transaction fees of a dollar or two are no big deal because Bitcoin isn't meant for buying coffee." Today, BTC is increasingly unusable as a means of paying for anything less expensive than a coffee shop so that rhetoric rings just a teensy bit hollow.
Another thought: it seems to me that one way to understand why the situation deteriorated so quickly is to think about the supply and demand curves for transactions / block space. As BTC has attracted more users over time, the demand curve has shifted to the right. And for the past year or so that rightward-moving demand curve has encountered the vertical line represented by the 1-MB supply quota. That alone would be enough to cause a relatively rapid price rise. What made the situation worse is the fact that we are (or recently were) in the mania phase of a hype cycle, meaning that the demand curve for transactions has been moving rightward faster than normal as new users flood in. And what I think has made the situation even worse than that is my suspicion that the portion of the demand curve that is now intersecting the supply curve is relatively steep representing highly inelastic demand. Why? Because it mostly represents purely speculative use (all other use cases having been rendered infeasible by the current fees) -- and because such use is relatively fee-insensitive. If you're attempting to move tens of thousands of dollars in BTC to an exchange to sell because there's been a huge spike in price, you're not going to care (much) about paying $20 in transaction fees vs. $50 or even $100. What you probably really care about is being confident that your transaction will actually get confirmed in a timely manner. And so you've got a nearly vertical demand curve moving rapidly to the right and intersecting a vertical supply curve. And the result of that is a really nasty exponential growth curve for transaction fees.
The pace at which transaction fees have risen recently is obviously not sustainable indefinitely. So what will keep it from being sustained? One possibility is that the idiotic supply quota on BTC block space will be lifted. Another is that the demand will eventually stop increasing as Bitcoin's increasingly broken functionality causes users to abandon (or never adopt in the the first place) BTC in favor of uncrippled alternatives. (Note that this is not really a desirable scenario for a good whose entire value is based on the network effect.) Or maybe the Lightning Network will be released soon and totally fix everything!
Seems like BTC has become a speculative instrument backed by human stupidity.
Norway
Well-Known Member
- Sep 29, 2015
- 2,424
- 6,410
@molecular @Roger_Murdock
Good points here. A normal user will probably get at least 3 tx fees for one normal purchase. One for the inititial transaction, one for the merchant to send to an exchange and one for the exchange to send BTC to a customer.
Good points here. A normal user will probably get at least 3 tx fees for one normal purchase. One for the inititial transaction, one for the merchant to send to an exchange and one for the exchange to send BTC to a customer.
Dusty
Active Member
- Mar 14, 2016
- 362
- 1,172
Nopara73 (Adam Ficsor), a well known BCH hater, had the "idea" to call his new project "Bitcoin Cash":
Presenting Bitcoin Cash — Semi-centralized, Bitcoin-pegged, Scalable, Instant, Anonymous Electronic Cash System
Presenting Bitcoin Cash — Semi-centralized, Bitcoin-pegged, Scalable, Instant, Anonymous Electronic Cash System
Last edited:
I used to have a little bit of respect for nopara73 for his effort to add some kind of privacy to Bitcoin... such respect quickly disappeared after I read @Dusty's post above.
What a moron.
What a moron.
albin
Active Member
- Nov 8, 2015
- 931
- 4,008
@molecular
Interesting thing to me about listening to Cliff High is that even if you don't buy the legitimacy of his AI methodology, there's still so much interesting stuff in there to think about that has nothing to do with making specific predictions. Even if you were to assume the predictive aspect is snakeoil, that's a great brainstorming session.
Interesting thing to me about listening to Cliff High is that even if you don't buy the legitimacy of his AI methodology, there's still so much interesting stuff in there to think about that has nothing to do with making specific predictions. Even if you were to assume the predictive aspect is snakeoil, that's a great brainstorming session.
molecular
Active Member
- Aug 31, 2015
- 372
- 1,391
@albin, oh yeah. Listening to Cliff High can be quite a "mind-opener". Greg Hunter is pushing him at every occasion to make predictions, though, so he can yell "oh my god" or "but that's huge, did you just say ... !?!?" and try to nail Cliff harder to some prediction.
But still, immensely enjoyable and always good food for thought.
But still, immensely enjoyable and always good food for thought.
KoKansei
Member
- Mar 5, 2016
- 49
- 360
A currency backed by something apparently in such abundant supply is definitely a bad idea.
Good lord, is this what passes for "humor" or "satire" on the core side? Talk about a sad effortpost.
Last edited:
Tirapon
New Member
- May 15, 2017
- 1
- 13
Just want to make my first post here . Been lurking for a while, but this seems to be the place where rationality is prevailing... I stopped regularly posting in the old forum years ago...
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1153767.msg12151261#msg12151261
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1153767.msg12151261#msg12151261
Welcome Tirapon! It's always great to see a familiar face from the good ole days of Bitcointalk come over and say hi.
