Topic: Bitcoin is slowly shit. (Read 12973 times)

I vote yes!

yes.

So can this thread be locked and moved to the graveyard already?

Not sure for other countries, but last time I checked, in france, when you send an unstamped letter, it is delivered, but recipient has to pay the stamp price to get the letter.
I'm wondering if that could be transposed to bitcoin, and I least think it's worth considering.

This is bullshit, I mailed a letter with no stamp and the postal service didn't deliver.

Fuck the USPS.

To sum things up, the OP is just a dumbass.

He had another thread in a different section about this and just recently reported that the issue was solved, the casino simply resent the BTC.
I've even had my mobile litecoin client get stuck in lingo sending payments before, no big deal, reset blockchain and resend.

Whoever tries to send without any fees is simply a dumbass. Fees have been necessary for quick transactions since I can remember, idiots were complaining that their transactions were lost back in 2011 even, because they didn't pay the fee.

As mining rewards shrink, and transaction activity increases, the TX fees will step in to cover paying the miners.

So... You registered in here in May 24th 2011 and you still do not understand LTC is a CLONE of BTC, which means that as soon as LTC has the same transaction volume as BTC you will need to pay fees to get your transactions in a block?

Really?

Seriously?

Wow. Just wow.

LTC has minimum mandatory fees (mmf) on low priority txs just like Bitcoin does.  The irony of your statement is that the mmf for LTC is about double that of BTC.

Minimum mandatory fee for low priority txs (high priority tx have no required fees on either network)
LTC: 0.01 LTC  (10 mLTC) = 2.5 US cents per KB
BTC: 0.0001 BTC (0.1 mBTC) =  1.3 US cents per KB

Facts.  I know they can be annoying.

Like USD Bank Transfers and Money Orders are quicker 

It can be done but it should be considered a hack as a last resort.  You will need to use the pywallet tool and delete the transaction from your wallet.  You will want to make separate backups BEFORE and AFTER the update.  Then you will need to ensure you node stays offline until other nodes forget about it.  If your node immediately goes online there is a chance another node will relay your tx back to you and your wallet will happily include it in its history (essentially undoing your erase so that is why I said make a post edit backup).  Still it can be done.  Eventually the entire network will drop your old tx and without your node to "remind them" by rebroadcasting it will be like the original tx never existed.  You can then create a new tx.  

You may wonder why doesn't the client just allow you to cancel.  Due to the way Bitcoin works you have no control over what other nodes do so while you can trivially "undoing" a tx locally you can force other nodes to also perform that undo.  This means your node will be out of sync with the rest of the network.  It is a common abstraction to think of "the network" as this unified system but really it is more like a sea of independent nodes which speak the same language.  So what kind of weird problems could occur if there was a "cancel" button in the client.

a) You can cancel a tx locally but it still end being confirmed in a block.
b) You can cancel a tx locally but your peers reject your modified tx because they still see the original as valid and thus the replacement is a fraudulent double spend attempt.
c) You can cancel a tx locally and create a new one but it happens to use different coins.  Both tx end up being included in a block and you double paid.
d) You can cancel a tx locally and pay a different person with those coins but the original tx confirms and now to the second person it looks like you performed a double spend.
Starting to see while you can technically cancel a tx locally (just delete it and stop broadcasting it) allowing users to do that is likely going to create a huge amount of confusion and chaos.

Still this entire issues has less to do with fees and more to do with the person running the casino has no clue what they are doing.  Not only did they send low priority tx w/ no fees (which means many nodes won't even relay them due to "spam" prevention) but the tx had NO CHANCE of being included in a block even with a massive fee.  The reason is that the inputs for the tx (all inputs are outputs of prior txs) are from txs (parents) which aren't confirmed either and one of those has the same issue (grandparent tx is unconfirmed).  The operator is utterly incompetent.  Worse the default client prevents you from making these types of mistakes.  You can't spend unconfirmed outputs and you can't bypass the min mandatory fee on low priority txs.  So the operator is using raw txs.  Raw txs plus incompetence is a good way to lose Bitcoins forever.  You can create raw tx which result in the permanent loss of Bitcoins.  It is a tool for experts only, experts who have done extensive testing.

As for "I want to hack my client because I don't want to pay fees" mentality.  Really this is cutting off your nose to spite your face.  The "min mandatory fee" ONLY applies to low priority txs and (post v0.8.2) is 0.1 mBTC or about $0.01.  It exists as an anti-DOS mechanism so even if you bypass it by hacking the client (or using raw txs) there is a good chance not all tx wil be relayed by all nodes. 

The simpler longer term solution for unconfirmed txs is for something which has been proposed called the "child pays parent" patch.   It doesn't need to change the protocol just how miners pick txs.  Currently miners will only include txs in a block if the inputs are already confirmed.  So you can't confirm a tx (tx A) which won't confirmed by spending it (tx B) because even if tx B has a fee no miner will include it until tx A has been confirmed.   With "child pays parent".  Miners will look backwards to find the unconfirmed inputs and include them as well.  So if miner accepts tx B (which has a fee) and tx B has tx A (unconfirmed) as an input then the miner would include both in the block.  Of course that still won't solve general incompetence which is the larger issue not the network.

brb announcing fasterererercoin

It in the name - fast as lite 3*10**8 m/s. Ask Einstein.

You're totally missing the point that litecoin is functionally identical to bitcoin, right? Works the same, so the same problems with Bitcoin confirms can happen with litecoin.

Anyway- another thing to think about it is that it's not the Bitcoin protocol itself that is causing the problem, it's more that miners have formed a cartel to enforce requiring network fees. (Which is how they are supposed to be paid after mining is finished) Miners basically agree that it's in their best interest to get everyone to by default pay a generous mining fee, because it's their money. They all know it, so they all do it, they don't really have an incentive to include transactions with no mining fee. At this point everyones out to make money. It would be the same with litecoin and will be the same once it gets far enough along. Part of the payment for mining is you earn the transaction fees. Hence, they aren't about to let people get comfortable with using it for free.

Would you stop that, please? You are acting like a door-to-door salesman that desperately tries to sell his stuff.



Sadly I cannot answer this.
I'm pretty sure it's possible and I remember reading something about pywallet.
The folks in the tech section surely can help with such a problem, if it should ever arrive.

And it will accept any and all transactions without fees even if the inputs are unconfirmed! Because all this talk is on-topic! /sarcasm

you right, and soon litecoin will be much faster then today.

Yes, but on the other hand, the thread turned out very informative on a few aspects of the whole process of transactions and fees that many people have lots of doubts about, so I'd leave it here if it were up to me to decide.

This should be moved to service discussion for the whatever Casino he was dealing with. This isn't a Bitcoin problem, it's user error on the part of the end user or the casino.

The casino has the coins. You need to contact them, give the transaction number and explain the situation. They have your money, and they have the obligation to re-initiate the transfer.

Edit: Also, as others have said, ALL blockchain based coins have the same mechanism, so it's not a Bitcoin specific thing. They made a bad transaction and the money never actually arrived.

That raises another interesting question: how to make that broadcasting stop in case the sender realizes he has set the transaction fee too low and wants to correct it?