Blocks are full. - page 17. | Bitcointalksearch.org

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 2965

Terminated.

Quote from: partysaurus on January 20, 2016, 11:20:45 AM

Fair enough. im not taking sides just so you know im just asking becuse im curious. do you have any article or thread i can read to help me grasp the whole thing about why blocksize increase is a bad thing. right now im not for or against. but it seems to be a subject that stirs up alot of feelings.

Well, I'd have to look for that information myself right now. The first thing that comes to mind is this:
Any examples of the 10 minute script. The best thing that you could do is ask the developers yourself on IRC if you really want to know.

partysaurus

sr. member

Activity: 574

Merit: 251

Quote from: Lauda on January 20, 2016, 10:42:37 AM

The correct statement is 'some blocks are full'. You can't just jump to conclusions based on data recovered in the last few hours. Out of the last few blocks I see a few at around 750kb.

Quote from: bitcoin carpenter on January 20, 2016, 10:20:48 AM

It is frustrating how much energy is being wasted. Just scale the blocksize already...

That can be a dangerous act.

Quote from: partysaurus on January 20, 2016, 10:12:42 AM

i have not been into all this bitcoin stuff for so long , but from all i read so far , i cant realy see why so much people are hating on bigger block sizes. Becuse all i can see and hear right now is that bitcoins would benfit from it a great deal.

Because you have no IT background and have not done adequate research. How could you jump to such conclusions? With a block size of 2 MB it is possible to construct a transaction that would take over 10 minutes to validate which would harm the network.

Fair enough. im not taking sides just so you know im just asking becuse im curious. do you have any article or thread i can read to help me grasp the whole thing about why blocksize increase is a bad thing. right now im not for or against. but it seems to be a subject that stirs up alot of feelings.

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 2965

Terminated.

Quote from: Cryptology on January 20, 2016, 10:52:06 AM

Do you know what is the current status of SegWit and when will it be released?

There's been a testnet for it for a while now. The planned release is April. To deploy a hard fork with consensus (95% or higher) it would most likely take the network more time than that (if we took that path).

Quote from: Blawpaw on January 20, 2016, 10:56:02 AM

If we already know that the solution is a block increase I don't understand why it should be an increase to 2mb. If the increase is to be to 2mb in 2 years or less the community will be facing the same problem again.
So, in this sense, the increase should be to at least 8mb or even more.

How about you don't suggest anything since it is obvious that you have no related knowledge?

Blawpaw

legendary

Activity: 1596

Merit: 1027

If we already know that the solution is a block increase I don't understand why it should be an increase to 2mb. If the increase is to be to 2mb in 2 years or less the community will be facing the same problem again.
So, in this sense, the increase should be to at least 8mb or even more.

Cryptology

legendary

Activity: 1008

Merit: 1001

In Cryptography We Trust

Quote from: watashi-kokoto on January 20, 2016, 10:54:38 AM

Quote from: Cryptology on January 20, 2016, 10:52:06 AM

Do you know what is the current status of SegWit and when will it be released?

Satoshi is working on it. Write him a letter:

Satoshi Nakamoto
Bitcoin Classic
Rue du simplon 4
Martigny 1920
Switzerland

Dude why don't you go and troll somewhere else?

watashi-kokoto

sr. member

Activity: 687

Merit: 269

Quote from: Cryptology on January 20, 2016, 10:52:06 AM

Do you know what is the current status of SegWit and when will it be released?

Satoshi is working on it. Write him a letter:

Satoshi Nakamoto
Bitcoin Classic
Rue du simplon 4
Martigny 1920
Switzerland

Amph

legendary

Activity: 3248

Merit: 1070

Quote from: Cryptology on January 20, 2016, 10:52:06 AM

Quote from: Lauda on January 20, 2016, 10:50:03 AM

Quote from: Cryptology on January 20, 2016, 10:49:17 AM

Fine. So what is the solution then? Staying with 1MB blocks and watch confirmation times grow to infinity?

The short term solution is SegWit.

Do you know what is the current status of SegWit and when will it be released?

https://bitcoin.org/en/bitcoin-core/capacity-increases-faq#roadmap

BitUsher

legendary

Activity: 994

Merit: 1035

Quote from: Lauda on January 20, 2016, 10:42:37 AM

Quote from: partysaurus on January 20, 2016, 10:12:42 AM

i have not been into all this bitcoin stuff for so long , but from all i read so far , i cant realy see why so much people are hating on bigger block sizes. Becuse all i can see and hear right now is that bitcoins would benfit from it a great deal.

Because you have no IT background and have not done adequate research. How could you jump to such conclusions? With a block size of 2 MB it is possible to construct a transaction that would take over 10 minutes to validate which would harm the network.

While this is factually true in of itself , it ignores the larger context of it being trivial to protect against CVE-2013-2292 with the appropriate sigop protections(code has already been produced). Therefore it would be more appropriate to use this arguments against any idiots who suggest that there are no risks from simply increasing one variable, namely maxBlockSize.

Quote from: Cryptology on January 20, 2016, 10:52:06 AM

Do you know what is the current status of SegWit and when will it be released?

Segwit has moved off the sidechain testnet into a open testnet since the end of last year. It is currently undergoing a lot of testing and these wallet/companies are supporting it -

Quote from: BitUsher on January 19, 2016, 11:04:53 PM

Updated list of wallets/companies planning to support SegWit:

https://bitcoincore.org/en/segwit_adoption/

Latest one is my favorite SPV - Mycelium -

https://twitter.com/MyceliumCom/status/689518860727377920

... and electrum just ack'ed

Expected to go live in April.

Cryptology

legendary

Activity: 1008

Merit: 1001

In Cryptography We Trust

Quote from: nichu on January 20, 2016, 10:52:54 AM

blockchain.info was offline for me ,whats really going on

It is still at 11 MB.

nichu

full member

Activity: 154

Merit: 100

blockchain.info was offline for me ,whats really going on

Cryptology

legendary

Activity: 1008

Merit: 1001

In Cryptography We Trust

Quote from: Lauda on January 20, 2016, 10:50:03 AM

Quote from: Cryptology on January 20, 2016, 10:49:17 AM

Fine. So what is the solution then? Staying with 1MB blocks and watch confirmation times grow to infinity?

The short term solution is SegWit.

Do you know what is the current status of SegWit and when will it be released?

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 2965

Terminated.

Quote from: Cryptology on January 20, 2016, 10:49:17 AM

Fine. So what is the solution then? Staying with 1MB blocks and watch confirmation times grow to infinity?

The short term solution is SegWit.

Cryptology

legendary

Activity: 1008

Merit: 1001

In Cryptography We Trust

Quote from: Lauda on January 20, 2016, 10:42:37 AM

Because you have no IT background and have not done adequate research. How could you jump to such conclusions? With a block size of 2 MB it is possible to construct a transaction that would take over 10 minutes to validate which would harm the network.

Fine. So what is the solution then? Staying with 1MB blocks and watch confirmation times grow to infinity?

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 2965

Terminated.

The correct statement is 'some blocks are full'. You can't just jump to conclusions based on data recovered in the last few hours. Out of the last few blocks I see a few at around 750kb.

Quote from: bitcoin carpenter on January 20, 2016, 10:20:48 AM

It is frustrating how much energy is being wasted. Just scale the blocksize already...

That can be a dangerous act.

Quote from: partysaurus on January 20, 2016, 10:12:42 AM

i have not been into all this bitcoin stuff for so long , but from all i read so far , i cant realy see why so much people are hating on bigger block sizes. Becuse all i can see and hear right now is that bitcoins would benfit from it a great deal.

Because you have no IT background and have not done adequate research. How could you jump to such conclusions? With a block size of 2 MB it is possible to construct a transaction that would take over 10 minutes to validate which would harm the network.

Amph

legendary

Activity: 3248

Merit: 1070

Quote from: bitcoin carpenter on January 20, 2016, 10:20:48 AM

It is frustrating how much energy is being wasted. Just scale the blocksize already...

it need consensus, dev don't want to release something that will not gather enough consensus and be useless basically

they are trying to see what the majority want before decide their move

Cryptology

legendary

Activity: 1008

Merit: 1001

In Cryptography We Trust

Sorry for the typo. You are right. I meant no spam / stress test.

Karartma1

legendary

Activity: 2310

Merit: 1422

Quote from: Cryptology on January 20, 2016, 10:05:30 AM

Right now Bitcoin's price is rallying and block are full. According to blockchain.info backlog of unconfirmed transactions is 11.6 MB right now and as far as I know there is now spam or stress test going on. How worse does it need to get?

Do you mean that there is NO spam or stress test going on?
Otherwise your post makes no sense to me.

Jet Cash

legendary

Activity: 2814

Merit: 2472

https://JetCash.com

Don't worry Obama is re-commissioning some redundant missiles to deliver blocks next month.

Kprawn

legendary

Activity: 1904

Merit: 1074

We staying below the 1400 transactions per block and with the stress tests, we experienced 1483 and 1711 respectively, so we getting close to a average of 1400 transactions per

block, as a average. The thing that worries me, is the decline in the estimated transaction volumes. The only people smiling seems to be the miners, because the miners revenue is

averaging above 1 750 000 US. Roll Eyes

..... Makes you wonder, why we seeing these high revenue, when transaction volumes are declining.

Cryptology

legendary

Activity: 1008

Merit: 1001

In Cryptography We Trust

I guess that we need to see frequent backlogs in 30 - 60 MB range for things to start changing.

Topic: Blocks are full. - page 17. (Read 14985 times)