Topic: Blocks are full. - page 5. (Read 14989 times)

Well there was some big institution behind it that is clear, maybe some jealous bank sponsored it? Who knows.

It looks like it's over, the TX/S shrunk to half since when I checked last time a few hours ago, and the unconfirmed ones as well.

And now the mempool is starting to shrink again back to normal levels.


People need to get used to these stuffs, it will happen many more times, and we cant let this shit destroy our community.

Well, then that/these person(s) have deep pockets I guess. I wonder who could think that this is a good investment at all.

Besides, wasn't there a pretty cheap way to spam with some metainformations? Though when this attack really is so expensive... dunno. Doesn't sound smart in any way.

Another 'network durability stress test' a.k.a 'ddos' a.k.a 'spam' a.k.a 'butthurt bitcoin classic users' ?

Cryptology



Unfortunately this is not really true. I got a number of people complaining about transactions not going through because they chose a standard fee of some kind. Looks like there are enough wallets out there that still can't deal with spam attacks.

---

Windpower



Some fear that it will be the first step only and have nightmares of much bigger blocks and that then someone could not run a node anymore.

Others explicitely don't want it because they want a fee market. Which means alot higher fees. They have the impression that bitcoin is a network for high amount transfers and that all small transfers are spam only.

Well, then there is the accusation that some of them do this only to promote lightning network. Which is practically using another network instead using bitcoin directly. Can't say that I give that idea much chances. Bitcoiners will be hard to convince.

And some others say that we first should implement SegWit. Which is a good thing but will get to it's borders relatively fast too. It can not help for very long.

---

AliceWonderMiscreations



Sure, amazon would probably avoid advertising this. Though even the community might already put pressure on the network only by realizing the chances showing up with amazon adopting.

Though if the would advertise situation could change fast.

It's a very theoretical question anyway. No serious business would invest now in something bitcoin related. With all the news of apocalypse because of forks, non working bitcoin transactions, fights in the community and and and. Nobody invests into such an unstable area.

If Amazon accepted bitcoin most people would still use credit cards, just like most people buying from newegg use credit card.

Before Amazon's volume could grow large enough for there to be a serious blockchain problem, your typical Tom Dick and Harry would have to own bitcoin and choose to spend it, and that's years away.

So pretty much even if we raise the block size, it is going to do nothing. Wow. Why is everyone making a fuss over it then?

Its a good thing most modern wallets dynamically adjust fees automatically in real time... There are a fee stranglers that need to be updated though.

Agreed. That data points in that direction. In any case for an average bitcoin user it really doesn't matter why block are full.

It is costing them a least 5-10k a day... so depends on how deep their pockets are. Normal users with a proper wallet that adjusts fees dynamically are unaffected . My txs have been getting through in the immediate block with fees ranging from 5 - 11 pennies per tx.

It will be fun to see this attack persist if it is funded large bank or government and watch as they both spur the adoption of segwit in April and run up millions of dollars in fees.

How long can they keep this up ?

Full because of natural growth? No. Full because of an on-going spam attack that created a huge backlog? Yes.



It is pretty clear that somebody is doing this on purpose.

Yes , Appears to be a spam attack. Users are suggested to pay 2-4 pennies usd more per tx (most wallets automatically adjust these days) to insure their txs immediately get in the next block. Here are some beautiful pictures of the culprits --







Look at how they differ from other tx's visually represented in the background.

Is it correct to say that blocks are full now?

Even if you would run a full node, 2 MB are far away from any need to upgrade your cpu or something. It's one block in average each 10 minutes. That can be very easily handle by practically every computer nowadays.

I have the Intel CPU G1610. I used it to mine as well as run Bitcoin Core. I do not see any problem.

I'll do it when I get back home (I don't remember them by heart). But it wasn't any high end machine even when I bought it.

Technically yes. There's good information on Bitcoin.org in regards to full nodes. Albeit if you don't forward port 8333 and run it constantly you don't really have a full node.

The age of a PC does not really tell us anything. How about you share the specifications?

My PC is bought few years ago, so it is surely low end. I run full node. Bitcoin core takes less than 1% of cpu and bandwith.

I run the Bitcoin Core, with all the default settings. Am I classified as a full node user? I have low end CPU.

Define 'ordinary Core wallet holders'? If you are using Bitcoin Core, then you need to sync up with the network in order to send out/see received transactions. However, unless you're running full nodes you don't really need to bother yourself with the requirements.