Topic: [Aug 2022] Mempool empty! Use this opportunity to Consolidate your small inputs! - page 8. (Read 88487 times)

Thanks for quoting me because I received a message on Telegram. I'm on vacation and haven't visited mempool.space and thanks to this quote, I received a notification on Telegram and I can't believe what my eyes has to see. Why on earth is anyone consolidating all the unconsolidated transactions today with 300-400 sat/vByte fees?

Is there any explanation to why they overpay? Usually, every business tries to save as much as possible and it's a little confusing why should they be overpaying transaction fees (a lot).

Call that an evidence but can you afford to make a Bitcoin transaction? I can't afford (maybe can but don't plan to waste money stupidly). It's becoming unattractive payment method for so many people, I think that that's more of a loss than an evidence that it works (DoS protection and a self-sustainability assurance mechanism).

To me, it looks like advocating for an extremely high house prices while not being able to afford a house.

blocks 846,874 to 846,934

fees are all over 1.04 btc and some are over 5 coins

so 60 blocks average fee for them around 3.5 coins

It might be a controversial take, but I'd rather have a delayed yet proper second layer solution, even if it's going to dissatisfy those transacting on-chain for a long time, than have every user temporarily satisfied but tricked into believing that rising the on-chain capacity arbitrarily is the way to go over the long term.

The future of money requires proper DoS protection and a self-sustainability assurance mechanism, and that's the block size limit. The fact that an on-chain transaction currently costs $30 is evidence that it works.

I stand corrected: they're now paying $15,000 per transaction.

I don't understand current transactions flooding mempool like 2eee1dacec1f807c681166518c32ce8fbe9c1d109423ed9c7c92a71fa1a6b52b, which spend around 150 2-of-3-multisig inputs worth 0.7x-ish BTC and pay a Tx fee of 11,111,874sat worth $7,923. That's in my opinion more than bonkers...

Of course, we don't know what such transactions are all about and maybe it's better not to know what kind of shady activities make such transactions "economic" for the sender.

The receiving address of many of those pending consolidations seems mostly to be bc1quhruqrghgcca950rvhtrg7cpd7u8k6svpzgzmrjy8xyukacl5lkq0r8l2d. Quite a lot of traffic in the past and now, every few seconds transactions with destination to this address pour in currently...

Regarding the past coin turnover of this address (more than 3.6m BTC) I'd assume it bolongs to some exchange or so.

And as of block 846896 tx fees surpassed the block subsidy, likely for some more blocks to come as those overpriced large consolidations keep pouring in like from a faucet. Madness, but a feast for miners!

To piss off people who are waiting for 1sat/vb to consolidate their dust?  

There are two entities at this right now:
- moron number one, OKX, they have thrown a huge chunk of tx themselves, funds generated from their multisig , there's no doubt there
- maybe moron two (assuming it's not okx) who has a really interesting history, he is the one that funded the address you mentioned:
https://mempool.space/address/bc1qprdf80adfz7aekh5nejjfrp3jksc8r929svpxk

In these 3 months:

Total received   ‎9,277,164.37521068 BTC
Total sent   ‎9,276,943.46038816 BTC
89,086 transactions, all overpaid

We need a blockexplorer that shows how much each address has spent on fees!

LE:


It's OKX and it's not something unusual, they always tend to overpay, but this time seems like more morons have managed to get the same timing, as Binance is not doing as any favor either right now.

Here's why:

Someone is broadcasting a small fortune in transaction fees:


The number of incoming transactions is often above average in batches, but now it's continuous for hours:


Most of the transactions are consolidations, like this one: it has received and sent 2 transactions in the past few days, all in a similar pattern. That's $6600 in transaction fees per transaction, consolidating in the dumbest possible way.

What to make of this? Why would anyone do this?

Same here.
I don't trust banks and they can always turn off payment cards and say that system is not working, that is already happening in some countries.
By using cards and phones for payments all the time people are just supporting introduction of CBDC crap and cash ban.

Here, cash is used less and less. People use more and more electronic payments, nowadays including contactless payments. The fact that you can be charged on multiple cards just for having your wallet close to a check-in machine doesn't seem to bother people.
I'd prefer cash for privacy, or anything else that doesn't create eternal records of who-pays-what in several databases.

Of course, of course. There is no disagreement here between you and me. Cash is the best fit for many use cases in many economies. I was more referring to this hypothetical scenario where people would decide to transition to using bitcoin via LN. If there is no easy use, then of course cash will remain the best option for everything pretty much forever in relatively stable economies. But if the goal is to foster adoption among those who want to use it for microtransactions, then some development/educational progress is inevitable. People are used to plug and play, they want to click maximum two buttons and be set up. Exactly as you said, when it "looks" difficult.


Again we agree and I am not in a place where I would have to complain about available services to transmit value from A to B. I am all good, I am just speaking from the perspective of potential adoption on a global scale and here technologies like LN do matter because otherwise people go and use alternative crypto networks, which generally is fine, but I think bitcoin could still do better as it hasn't reached its innovative peak, if it will ever.

This may be controversial but the average Joe may not need to use Bitcoin LN. Cash is the best fit for small scale daily transactions, incurs zero fees and is accepted everywhere. Those who need LN to make small, regular online transactions will be technical enough to set up a lightning channel. I don't think there's anything too technical about it, but I understand there's a barrier to adoption when it "looks" difficult to understand.

Everyone who will adopt Bitcoin will find their way to it and use it appropriately. The conventional financial system works fine for a lot of people who don't want any form of custody or privacy.

I agree on this.

The number of channels is dropping, while the network capacity is increasing. There's now on average about 0.1 Bitcoin per channel, and that's 3 times more than it was 3 years ago. If I'd have to guess, I'd say that's related to on-chain transaction fees. I wouldn't want to have $7k in a hot wallet, but small channels aren't worth the on-chain fees. So maybe LN is moving more and more to custodial networks, and I'm okay with that. I'd much rather send $100 to a well-connected custodial LN wallet than sending $7k in my own LN hot wallet.

I see, but I am sure you know what I mean right? I imagine a LN app that works similar to the setup of a VPN where - with the simplest version - you just install the app, choose the country and click connect. I know more measures can be taken to increase security and privacy etc., but for the average Joe to get going with LN in order to be able to transact at reasonable transactions costs, an app for LN should probably work like that.

If there are apps like that, then it is a problem of visibility that people don't know where to find them or which developers to trust. As soon as people have to read into documentation, I think that slows down growth far too much. Some guys from this forum here take the time to understand the details behind it and how to set up nodes etc., but to get a true microtransaction economy going that makes bitcoin feasible for everyday usage, an app with plug and play character would be needed.

For now bitcoin is dysfunctional for lots of transactions when the fees explode once again. I have just recently got a smaller one stuck for three weeks and RBF wasn't worth it. That's frustrating and someone who newly gets into bitcoin and wants to try it out might not use it again.

When you look at the stats and compare that to 3 or so years ago you'll notice how much advancement LN has made. Sure there's still lots of room for more advancements and adoptions, but it has come a long way.

There are dedicated LN wallets and it is now an option on SPV wallets like electrum, this has made it easier to set up and use. Some exchange also now accept it too.

Even if it had some active development, I think it still lacks robustness due to its relatively low market cap. A guy like Elon Musk can still move that coin by double digit percentages just by making a comment about it. Last time he pumped to something like $0.60 and then it dropped like a rock straight to the bottom. I wouldn't want to hold such a billionaire's toy as an investment. That's gambling and the only thing that counts is whether Musk tweets about it again or not. I think that is quite problematic and development could be announced, but nobody knows whether it is sustainable.

Bitcoin still shows organic growth, but look at the DOGE spikes. That's not a coin that's organically growing.

What's indeed concerning is that LN solutions don't seem to be advancing. When I talk to someone holding BTC, the very vast majority still has no idea about how the LN could take effect. Would it be possible to build an app that's so easy to use that it would connect my grandma to LN channels with just two clicks? I think that is how it should be for all micro or daily consumption transactions, whatever that maybe in different countries. Channel setup and connections should somehow be fully automated.

But DOGE really doesn't seem like the answer to bitcoin problems

Fuck doggie coin and any suggesting to invest into that shitcoin more than just on some kind of a pump and dump basis, and having a plan to invest for 33-ish years into that shitcoin seems really retarded... You still have not figured out the value of bitcoin, Philip?  Horey sheit.

I am not too likely to be alive in 2057 either.. and maybe if I get another 25-ish years, that might be about as much as I might expect... .... but whatever, so far I am not planning to buy any doggie coin or litecoin either... Oh?  woops. I forgot that I already own some light coin since about 2016. or maybe it was earlier than that, so yeah it is maybe .0002 the size of my BTC holdings, so yeah, maybe I might buy some doggie coin that might be around that same size of my BTC holdings, but I doubt that investing any more than a percent or two would be a good idea for anyone.. but yeah, surely people do all kinds of things. so yeah, my LTC holdings are about 0.02% the size of my BTC holdings and I am not opposed to some similar token level investments into any of the shitcoins, so maybe if I had 100 shitcoins they might add up to 2% of my bitcoin holdings... and yeah, I do have some other shitcoins that coincidentally are larger percentages than LTC.. and so for example my ETH  is nearly 0.1% of my bitcoin size.. I am a bit surprised about that.. but it is also one of those things that I have not really touched for a while, and I sold some of them in 2017-ish.

I'm a bit surprised to see that this solution has not been considered by btc devs yet. It seems like the best one as a compromise, to avoid getting into more block size debates.

I think it would also decrease the incentive for miners to support these garbage projects like Runes, since at least DOGE and LTC have some actual utility attached to them.

I'm not betting on a memecoin without active development. Chances are it's completely gone in (much less than) 50 years.

Miner fees in dollars have only gone up so far (if I ignore short-term fluctuations). Lower block rewards are a feature, not a bug.

and fees could be minimum of 110 sats or $110. if we don’t fix the reward to fee ratios.

I am old so I will be gone by 2057 I will be 100. But doge has fixed the reward to fee issue as I type and doge has ever shrinking inflation rates. At my age of 67 btc is a decent bet but if you are 20 doge is likely to be really good by the time you are 67.

I see btc in trouble by 2050 unless they figure a fix for reward fee issues.