Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[VeritasSapere]

I am sad to see this, we are now sitting at 30k unconfirmed transactions in the mempool.

https://blockchain.info/unconfirmed-transactions

I am sad to see this. Bitcoin is not meant to operate in such an overloaded state. That was never part of the original design or plan. The blocksize limit should be above the average transaction volume. You have your head in the sand if you think that making Bitcoin less reliable and more expensive is a good thing. It most certainly is not, we do not even have layer two solutions right now, which is why new users will most likely adopt fiat and altcoin solutions instead. If the blocksize is not increased I expect to see Bitcoin out competed and obsolesced.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1381391.msg14048962#msg14048962

 

[_mr_e]

Sooner or later miners are going to want to collect those fees...

 

[dgenr8]

our own @dgenr8 thinks brg444 is maaku7 given a particular trolling style.

What I said was, the way brg444 interacts with maaku is revealing. Dismayed disagreement vs. the usual insults and flames. brg444 has also been seen in bitcoin-wizards offering up praise for the troops. Though he behaves terribly in IRC, he is never punished (and punishment is handed out like candy there).

Once brg444 said bitcoin was being purged of undesirable people. As this was during Greg Maxwell's absence I said that wasn't very kind to gmaxwell. brg444's response was to tell me to "fuck right off, tool."

 

[cypherdoc]

@dgenr8

precisely. somehow, he is in the inner circle.

 

[Norway]

https://tradeblock.com/bitcoin/
Do I read this right? 1 million bitcoin in the mempool? (I know the amount is not related to capacity, but it's a lot of bitcoin!)

 

[freetrader]

@dgenr8

precisely. somehow, he is in the inner circle.

He must be heading up this trolling op - but whether this is Soluvox doing this as 'official business' for real money or whether this is just him (maybe with several friends) doing this as a little business on the side for some bitcoins - I don't know. Given that it's been going on for ages and has only recently ramped up, I tend to favor the latter.

It's surprising how openly Blockstream employees associate with these people though. Not dissimilar to the theymos & co situation.

Like with the DDOS attackers, it would help if we had someone who could invest time in analysis to see if a money trail has been left on the chain.

 

[satoshis_sockpuppet]

I wonder what will happen when the next crash comes and we have full blocks like we have now.
It might become pretty ugly if people can't transfer their coins to the exchanges fast enough while the price declines by 1$/min. It's ugly now, but the price is slowly rising. In the other case, people will panic and the headlines will be great.

 

[Fatman3002]

Looks like Mike Hearn was right.

 

[VeritasSapere]

Fortunately we can reconcile ourselves, with the idea that if the price does crash because of full blocks then it would place a very strong incentive on the miners to increase the blocksize. In this case we can expect the miners to act quickly in order to preserve their investment.

However if the price stays stable then it will be hard to know if Bitcoin is really suffering from this issue, since much of this activity will move to alternative cryptocurrencies and fiat, we could even see Bitcoin become overtaken as the dominant cryptocurrency before miners act. Though I can conclude from this that the price will not crash at least, and if it did we will see an increased blocksize, resolving the problem and obviously correcting the price, I think this we can be more sure of.

However a stable price with the altcoins gaining a bigger market share because of full blocks might not be enough of a cue for the miners to act.

 

[freetrader]

I've been thinking what the current mining cartel might be getting out of the trajectory visible from the HK deal.

Imagine: postpone a HF long enough that you have a shock. Let the price drop a little - just sufficient to weed out smaller miners by driving them over the cliff.
Hedge against your own losses a little with altcoin that you can set your ASICs to mine without much trouble, in case things get rough.

The result? A most welcome strengthening of the existing cartel power, with mutual benefit to Blockstream who can point to "concensus" and support of a mining majority while strongly limiting on-chain adoption which would really impact returns on their medium-to-long-term off chain solutions.

Rinse and repeat as long as the getting is good.

 

[Christoph Bergmann]

If this continues they - whoever "they" are - will not wait till july.

The deal of the roundtable was that miners will not run segwit untill core merged a hard fork with a blocksize increase into the code. So this will be july.

If we suppose coinbase and blockchain.info will run classic by that time and be loyal to the classic roadmap, which implements an own version of segwit in q3-4, than the capacity increase effect of Segwit will be almost neclegtable at that time and only illustrate that core's plans are "too little, too late".

There's no way "they" will watch bitcoin been destroyed. If the madness continues, everybody will wake up in some weaks: payment processors, nodes, miners, markets, holders. There will still be a small, vocal and radical circle of brg444, his buddies and the rumanians, but I think they will be insulated.

@freetrader
I think it's easier. Miners are still impressed with core's technical knowledge and are in fear of anarchy in bitcoin development. But they are not dumb. The HK consens gives them formally the freedom to test classic and announce classic blocks while it enabled a mechanism to force core to plan a hf.
To some degree miners are tricked into core's argumentation like "we can't take every transaction of the world on the blockchain" - "a hard fork can destroy everything" - "we have so many problems to solve" etc. And they underestimated the effect of reaching the limit.

--

Edit: just for some appetite for gossip: what are the indicators that brg444 is a trollish version of maaku7?

 

[solex]

This poll on BCT 18 months ago shows that the average tx fee today ~10c/tx is greater than what 80% of users would expect in a normal environment. Markets always have some tolerance for monkeying with prices, but this flexibility can stop at any time and users will give up or go elsewhere.

For sending a simple, standard transaction or payment in bitcoins: How much should it cost?
$2 or more 9 (6.6%)
$1.30 0 (0%)
80 cents 1 (0.7%)
50 cents 5 (3.6%)
30 cents 0 (0%)
20 cents 8 (5.8%)
12 cents 4 (2.9%)
8 cents 4 (2.9%)
5 cents 22 (16.1%)
3 cents 14 (10.2%)
1 cent or less 70 (51.1%)

Total Voters: 137
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=827209.0

 

[cypherdoc]

incredible recovery in Classic node count. and that's even with all mine still down:

 

[sickpig]

@cypherdoc

your nodes down? Classic DDoS?

edit:

if that's the case: by chance would you mind to share yours bitcoind debug.log files along with your bitcoin.conf(s). I'm in the process of setting up a mechanism to detect and block sneaky peers in a way to prevent the mapping of full nodes. Having access to those info could be useful to get a clearer picture of the way the attackers are operating.

 

[freetrader]

I wonder how the Classic Cloud fared through this first wave...
It needs an aggregate status page.

Seeing how it's filled up nicely I think it needs a capacity increase

Go team Big Blocks !

 

[cypherdoc]

[doublepost=1456780633][/doublepost]

@cypherdoc

your nodes down? Classic DDoS?

edit:

if that's the case: by chance would you mind to share yours bitcoind debug.log files along with your bitcoin.conf(s). I'm in the process of setting up a mechanism to detect and block sneaky peers in a way to prevent the mapping of full nodes. Having access to those info could be useful to get a clearer picture of the way the attackers are operating.

yeah, i have 4 down which have been null routed until later today sometime.

i got one back up with the regex edited as above brought a new one up as well which is DL'ing BC.

edit: i'll share whatever you want

 

[cypherdoc]

 

[freetrader]

GG Brian.

Looks like another dispatch just came in - a filing under "Satoshi Roundtable sums up proposals for bitcoin developing":

The article says it was proposed that a third team should be added:

It was proposed even that there should be a third team other than Core or Classic to work on the protocol.

I'm confused - I thought we already have the XT and Unlimited teams, for a total of 4 now (for those keeping track).

Instructions unclear - are they proposing a fifth team should be added?

Ignore all rumors about a fifth column!

 

[freetrader]

In other news, Luke-jr being himself:


I for one, am glad that such safe spaces exist.

 

[Justus Ranvier]

http://www.openbitcoinprivacyproject.org/2016/02/announcing-the-2nd-edition-of-our-bitcoin-wallet-privacy-rating-report/