Topic: Blockchain split of 4 July 2015 - page 2. (Read 45630 times)
Does this affect BreadWallet too?
Everyone posting in this thread about tx fees and delays, you are posting in the WRONG THREAD. None of that has anything to do with the fork on 4.July. Take your tx discussions here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1111811.240
I'm assuming that users are just redirected here as its still the highlight topic in the news feed
News: ♦♦♦ If you are using any wallet other than Bitcoin Core 0.10.x or 0.9.5, then you should not trust incoming transactions until they have ~30 confirmations. More info. (https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/blockchain-split-of-4-july-2015-1108304)
Everyone posting in this thread about tx fees and delays, you are posting in the WRONG THREAD. None of that has anything to do with the fork on 4.July. Take your tx discussions here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1111811.240
i'm wondering about : i am making a software that check the rules of transactions so if it's a fake confirmed transaction the software will detect it ( but cannot confirm it)
is this will be usefull
to detect fake confired transactions .
sorry for m english.
What do you mean fake confirmation? As in it is confirmed in a fork and not the real blockchain?is this will be usefull
to detect fake confired transactions .sorry for m english.
my software will detect if it's false or true. good transaction or bad transaction.
The miners will not confirm any "fake" transaction, and a "fake" transaction is theoretically improbable in the bitcoin network. The network itself is secure enough, given that miners and nodes spread all around the world checks the validity of each transactions and blocks made within the network.
i'm wondering about : i am making a software that check the rules of transactions so if it's a fake confirmed transaction the software will detect it ( but cannot confirm it)
is this will be usefull to detect fake confired transactions .
sorry for m english.
What do you mean fake confirmation? As in it is confirmed in a fork and not the real blockchain?is this will be usefull
to detect fake confired transactions .sorry for m english.
my software will detect if it's false or true. good transaction or bad transaction.
i'm wondering about : i am making a software that check the rules of transactions so if it's a fake confirmed transaction the software will detect it ( but cannot confirm it)
is this will be usefull to detect fake confired transactions .
sorry for m english.
What do you mean fake confirmation? As in it is confirmed in a fork and not the real blockchain? is this will be usefull
to detect fake confired transactions .sorry for m english.
i'm wondering about : i am making a software that check the rules of transactions so if it's a fake confirmed transaction the software will detect it ( but cannot confirm it)
is this will be usefull to detect fake confired transactions .
sorry for m english.
is this will be usefull
to detect fake confired transactions .sorry for m english.
Don't worry, it will be done soon or later. It works for me after 3 days and 114 seen by peers:)
Peers relay transactions - they don't include them in blocks - that is the job of miners. On the other hand, the more peers that have seen your transaction the more chances that it won't be "forgotten" by miners as time goes on.In the current unusual hight traffic conditions, please ensure that you include 2 to 3 times the amount of fees that you would normally, that will increase your chances of your transactions to be included in the next block.
The positive thing about all this Bitcoin spam hysteria, is that no one can loose bitcoins - the "confirmation" of the transfers only get delayed if you paid the "recommended" tx fee. An alternative to Bitcoin in the US is ACH, but with ACH, I have to wait 5 business days for them to transfer from my bank account to Coinbase... 2 to 3 days delay on the Bitcoin network doesn't seem long anymore (for a 2.5 cents fee). With a $0.25 fee, I get my funds in Bitcoin within 10 minutes. Also compare this to a bank fee of $3.00 if I withdraw cash from an ATM not associated with my bank... Everything is relative.
I guess I could also use Litecoin, with its anti-spam feature, a network that can already handle 4 times the amount of transactions per seconds compared to Bitcoin (4MB per 10 minutes), and 4 times faster to achieve 6 confirmations blocks - but then, if I continued, I would be considered an altcoin troll and expelled from this section of the forum
Litecoin is already crashing, unfortunately. What we need is a Bitcoin dev to implement that Litecoin feature asap. In fact I Have no idea why this wasn't already implemented a long time ago. I guess its the problem of being the biggest coin ever, you will face problems when trying to reach consensus.
What I mean to ... I do not know , who would you tell me ?
Will online wallets like Mycelium for example automatically adjust the EMF to help push transactions through or is it recommended to up the fee personally to 0.4mBTC?
In Mycelium you can increase the fee manually. Tap the miner fee button to make it change from "normal" to "priority," which adds about .0001 to make it .0002, depending on what the normal fee was. Mycelium calculates the normal fee by tx size.If you want .0004 you may be out of luck.
thanks arnalt
I was make PH $370 to day.... thank you
Don't worry, it will be done soon or later. It works for me after 3 days and 114 seen by peers:)
hi I am having issues with my bitcoin core v 0.10.2
cd44f9b5ae4c5290301adf6228aaace557df5aa5c46b13d21f016934e3655be6-000
6bbba9afdde91a525bdca1ef79387771e4253bb43e9d0f9ce580f49a8fe5ba43-000
these transactions wont confirm one I made on 7/7/2015
and it still hasn't got one confirm
any idea whats wrong
they show up on the blockchain but no confirms
cd44f9b5ae4c5290301adf6228aaace557df5aa5c46b13d21f016934e3655be6-000
6bbba9afdde91a525bdca1ef79387771e4253bb43e9d0f9ce580f49a8fe5ba43-000
these transactions wont confirm one I made on 7/7/2015
and it still hasn't got one confirm
any idea whats wrong
they show up on the blockchain but no confirms
Will online wallets like Mycelium for example automatically adjust the EMF to help push transactions through or is it recommended to up the fee personally to 0.4mBTC?
There was someone(it is not know, if it was the same person) trying that some weeks ago and he failed pretty hard. Then he tried it again and failed again and now we have this from maybe the same person or a copycat.
So, there is a lot of preparation to that and you need some servers. The whole thing is also not cheap, when it comes to transaction fees.
Also keep in mind, that some people are already working on counter-measures.
So, there is a lot of preparation to that and you need some servers. The whole thing is also not cheap, when it comes to transaction fees.
Also keep in mind, that some people are already working on counter-measures.
The first "stress test" was organized informally by a crowd call on /r/bitcoin. Each volunteer spammed what and when it felt like, during a specified time window.
The second "stress test" was organized by a mysterious entity called "coinwallet.eu". They said they had ~5000 euros to spend on fees. that attempt failed after spending ~500 euros because their servers broke under the load. The testalso wasn't effective because they were using low fees.
This test is their new attempt, with more servers and smarter scripts, paying higer and adaptive fees. They said that their aim was to get 250 MB of unconfirmed transactions on the queues; which, with 1 MB blocks filled 50%, will take ~10 days to clear after they stop the test.
They are already at 150 MB, still climbing. Yesterday they managed to drive up the "effective minimum fee" (EMF) that you would need to pay for prompt service, to ~100'000 satoshis/kB, or ~0.4 mBTC (~0.11 USD) for a typical transaction. (Maybe more, the plots that I am watching broke down at that point.) Now they seem to be using lower fees, because the EMF is less than half of that even though the backlog is much bigger.
One jerk can jam up Bitcoin for the entire world?
Quote
on a network that can handle about 7 only.
Not sure if such a person could be banned or declined service, restricted in their access or priority over others with reference to their previous (recent) use perhaps. The natural state of all capitalist systems is be thrown apart and in a way its a positive because it forces a tendency towards competitive useful products, sure this is a fool screwing things up but it has to be anticipated he wont be the last to try or even that it might occur naturally under stress
I hesitate to bring this up because people are mistaken about how, but the forks do in fact contribute to delays.
When you've got 50% of the hashing power working on a bad fork, you've only got 50% of the hashing power working on a good fork. While this situation is in effect, you can only form about 50% of the "nominal" number of blocks in the good fork.
That leaves only room for 50% of the normal number of transactions and the remainder do in fact start to pile up when they come in faster than the reduced-capacity good block chain can handle.
When you've got 50% of the hashing power working on a bad fork, you've only got 50% of the hashing power working on a good fork. While this situation is in effect, you can only form about 50% of the "nominal" number of blocks in the good fork.
That leaves only room for 50% of the normal number of transactions and the remainder do in fact start to pile up when they come in faster than the reduced-capacity good block chain can handle.
You are correct. However, the bad fork of the "Fork of July" lasted only for 6 blocks. Another bad fork on July 5th lasted for 3 blocks. We haven't seen anymore bad fork since.
The current delay in the transactions is due to a spammer (attack) on the Bitcoin network, who sends peaks of 150 transactions per seconds on a network that can handle about 7 only. A work around - if you really want to send a bitcoin transaction, is to include a transaction fee of at least 0.0005 BTC per kb of data. A normal one input, one output transaction is 0.6 kb - so include a minimum of 0.0003 BTC. If you add any more inputs or outputs to your transaction, add more fees. If you stick to 0.0001 BTC per transactions, be ready to wait at least 18 hours before the first confirmation... at the moment. The miners will include in the next block the highest fees first, then go down the list...
This situation is similar to a Los Angeles rush hour when there's an accident on the highway, and the 6 lanes traffic is diverted to a 1 lane surface street - with traffic lights... Look at it like an additional fee to be able to ride on the carpool lane - which is clear of the accident, of course!
Is there a dedicated thread somewhere to talk about this (third?) attack? I've seen several discussions verging towards this topic but I haven't found the official thread on this week's attack (who's funding it now? etc)
There should be a way to input a value that would represent the time you want to wait for the confirmation and the wallet automatically suggests the fee depending on the volume of transactions as well.
Jump to: