[Aug 2022] Mempool empty! Use this opportunity to Consolidate your small inputs!

LoyceV

legendary

Activity: 3290

Merit: 16489

Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021

Quote from: NapHappy on April 18, 2024, 05:13:56 PM

My logic is that
1. We will see a drop in the hash rate once the halving occurs due to mining being unprofitable for inefficient miners, this will lead to longer block times until the difficulty is adjusted 4 days later. Longer block times means people paying higher fees to get into the next block.

Miners must have already calculated in the drop in block reward. Some of them may turn off their older hardware at that point, but I don't expect a significant impact. Besides, it's less than 50% they're "losing". Earlier drops in Bitcoin price (around 80%) had a much larger effect on their earnings. Blocks will be fine.

NapHappy

jr. member

Activity: 39

Merit: 17

Quote from: stompix on April 18, 2024, 04:21:22 PM

Quote from: NapHappy on April 18, 2024, 03:04:58 PM

The days after the halving tomorrow and before the difficulty adjustment in about 5 days will be brutal for fees with the Runes added in. It will likely take some weeks after the difficulty adjustment for fees to settle out to a new normal.

Why?
First, the difficulty has nothing to do with the amount of spam those guys throw at the chain.
If you think that there will be a massive block slowdown that won't happen in 5 days either, because 2/3 of the period has passed, so even if we are going to see something like 20% down instantly it will only last 6 days out of which 4 are doing the weekend.
Costly, a big clog, maybe, but in no way brutal.

Plus I'm not even convinced about that 20%, we just had 4% up previously, and even right now we're 2% in the green with faster blocks, as I said in the speculation topic, my bet is on at max 10% during the first adjustment.

My logic is that
1. We will see a drop in the hash rate once the halving occurs due to mining being unprofitable for inefficient miners, this will lead to longer block times until the difficulty is adjusted 4 days later. Longer block times means people paying higher fees to get into the next block.

2. At the same time, Runes come into play, also driving up the fees.

3. We are already in a high fee environment, this is just adding to it.

"Brutal" is a subjective term, I just see things getting even worse for a while due to the above.

I haven't been around long enough to understand the nuances of what will drive the difficulty up or down, but if BTC stays above $60k I agree that the difficulty drop won't be drastic.

stompix

legendary

Activity: 2828

Merit: 6108

Jambler.io

Quote from: NapHappy on April 18, 2024, 03:04:58 PM

The days after the halving tomorrow and before the difficulty adjustment in about 5 days will be brutal for fees with the Runes added in. It will likely take some weeks after the difficulty adjustment for fees to settle out to a new normal.

Why?
First, the difficulty has nothing to do with the amount of spam those guys throw at the chain.
If you think that there will be a massive block slowdown that won't happen in 5 days either, because 2/3 of the period has passed, so even if we are going to see something like 20% down instantly it will only last 6 days out of which 4 are doing the weekend.
Costly, a big clog, maybe, but in no way brutal.

Plus I'm not even convinced about that 20%, we just had 4% up previously, and even right now we're 2% in the green with faster blocks, as I said in the speculation topic, my bet is on at max 10% during the first adjustment.

Quote from: LoyceV on April 18, 2024, 04:18:58 AM

However, in this case, I checked some of the inputs, and all of them were funded earlier this month. It makes me curious why someone would waste so much money this way.

Did the same, 14 out of 15 were funded 2 days prior and the only activity on those addresses was one funding tx.
So maybe a casino/cex/something collecting user deposits?

NapHappy

jr. member

Activity: 39

Merit: 17

Quote from: Pmalek on April 18, 2024, 11:28:42 AM

Quote from: RickDeckard on April 15, 2024, 09:16:16 AM

This is just mind-blowing:

The monkey boys have calmed down a bit and the transaction fees are more than twice as cheap right now. But I am not optimistic for the near future. The halving is coming and with it a new monkey protocol on the day of the halving. Bananas will again raise the fees to make Bitcoin unusable for normal people. We will have to wait a long time I am afraid for the perfect opportunities to carry out proper consolidations.

The days after the halving tomorrow and before the difficulty adjustment in about 5 days will be brutal for fees with the Runes added in. It will likely take some weeks after the difficulty adjustment for fees to settle out to a new normal.

Pmalek

legendary

Activity: 2730

Merit: 7065

Farewell, Leo. You will be missed!

Quote from: RickDeckard on April 15, 2024, 09:16:16 AM

This is just mind-blowing:

The monkey boys have calmed down a bit and the transaction fees are more than twice as cheap right now. But I am not optimistic for the near future. The halving is coming and with it a new monkey protocol on the day of the halving. Bananas will again raise the fees to make Bitcoin unusable for normal people. We will have to wait a long time I am afraid for the perfect opportunities to carry out proper consolidations.

Synchronice

hero member

Activity: 784

Merit: 733

Watch Bitcoin Documentary - https://t.ly/v0Nim

Quote from: LoyceV on April 17, 2024, 09:02:05 AM

Here's a good example of how not to consolidate your small inputs: 217 inputs, 21 outputs, 0.07247704 BTC sent in total, and 0.04420628 BTC paid in fees. Some of the inputs are literally worth less than the fee paid to include them.

I think that many people don't know about transaction inputs and outputs and when they make a transaction from their wallet, instead of using a coins control feature, they click on max button and send all the coins together.

Quote from: LoyceV on April 18, 2024, 04:18:58 AM

However, in this case, I checked some of the inputs, and all of them were funded earlier this month. It makes me curious why someone would waste so much money this way.

Probably he needed money, didn't have enough patience to wait for fees to fall down and put all the inputs to send money (I have done that only once when I was super upset about fees and was forced to use Bitcoin).
To be honest, it makes me curious, why people pay so much fees to create ordinals inscriptions. Are thousands of ordinals sold each day? And are they sold so expensively that it worth to pay hundreds and thousands in transaction fees? I have seen ordinals pay x100 and more than its recommended to pay to get transaction confirmed.

Maybe there is a secret sauce that we miss here.

LoyceV

legendary

Activity: 3290

Merit: 16489

Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021

Quote from: Cricktor on April 17, 2024, 04:45:48 PM

We don't know the purpose of this transaction and I would've done a lot different already upfront. Everyone has the freedom to turn his coins into transaction fees. Is it wise? I don't think so.

My first assumption was that it's someone who doesn't know what he's doing. It happens: someone has been collecting dust inputs for years, and when he finally decides to spend it, his wallet automatically decides to add a very large transaction fee.

However, in this case, I checked some of the inputs, and all of them were funded earlier this month. It makes me curious why someone would waste so much money this way.

NotATether

legendary

Activity: 1568

Merit: 6660

bitcoincleanup.com / bitmixlist.org

Quote from: Cricktor on April 17, 2024, 04:45:48 PM

Indeed, doesn't look very economical to me either. As far as I glimpsed over the transaction, that were 217 legacy address inputs. Why still legacy address use?

Financial reasons perhaps (ironically), as infrastructure for creating Segwit wallets and transactions is still severely lacking even in 2024 and most companies can't be arsed to hire more engineers to update their systems.

It's one of the things that ZPyWallet tries to solve, but admittedly it's going to take much more than a Python library to create a framework where people can easily use Segwit addresses.

Cricktor

hero member

Activity: 714

Merit: 1010

Crypto Swap Exchange

Quote from: LoyceV on April 17, 2024, 09:02:05 AM

...

Indeed, doesn't look very economical to me either. As far as I glimpsed over the transaction, that were 217 legacy address inputs. Why still legacy address use? Anyway, not my cup of tea and the transaction sender might have a reason to shovel an absurd proportion of the transacted amount as fees to miners. At least the fee rate is declared as optimal at the time the transaction was confirmed.

We don't know the purpose of this transaction and I would've done a lot different already upfront. Everyone has the freedom to turn his coins into transaction fees. Is it wise? I don't think so.

LoyceV

legendary

Activity: 3290

Merit: 16489

Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021

Here's a good example of how not to consolidate your small inputs: 217 inputs, 21 outputs, 0.07247704 BTC sent in total, and 0.04420628 BTC paid in fees. Some of the inputs are literally worth less than the fee paid to include them.

RickDeckard

legendary

Activity: 994

Merit: 2830

Quote from: stompix on April 15, 2024, 08:28:30 AM

Actually even funnier, they aren't even collecting their own inputs via their pool, they have like 50 unconfirmed consolidations sitting there for months.

This is just mind-blowing:

The amount of fees that people are willing to pay just to insert random images into the blockchain amazes me. 204 sat/vB is just an obscenity.

stompix

legendary

Activity: 2828

Merit: 6108

Jambler.io

Quote from: Synchronice on April 14, 2024, 07:18:11 AM

Binance owns pools, so they don't care about fees, high fee situation is very beneficial for them but I didn't know if Bitfinex was paying that much, as far as I can tell, they don't own any pool. It doesn't make any sense to me, why should anyone pay more than recommended. Slightly above recommended is okay but many people pay 30x and 40x over the recommended amount.

Binance isn't forcing its transactions through their pool, for example this was just confined by antpool:
https://mempool.space/tx/44043a606a2d0c8c9513d750bf628bc2b2e17d4b91e39a107c78334d796bcff5
they just paid 148sat/vb, it says optimal but optimal my ass it's all because they've dumped themselves half a block of tx at over 100sat/vb

Actually even funnier, they aren't even collecting their own inputs via their pool, they have like 50 unconfirmed consolidations sitting there for months.

And now to make Switzerland's blood boil again, I present you:
https://mempool.space/block/00000000000000000000581af7f866e530053928e8b0e7c3dfe899923d64a9fc

Quote from: ABCbits on April 14, 2024, 05:19:18 AM

Quote from: LoyceV on April 13, 2024, 10:04:54 AM

I'm not sure, but it looks like it: exactly the same fee, exactly the same transaction, often using the previous outputs as inputs, and broadcasting them in batches.

Or maybe several people use same script/software which create TX with static or poor fee rate choice algorithm.

My bet would be on those services that offer inscription and minting for a fee, you just upload a jpg and they give you a quota on what it will cost you.

Synchronice

hero member

Activity: 784

Merit: 733

Watch Bitcoin Documentary - https://t.ly/v0Nim

Another ordinals spammer overpaid 255x in transaction fees. How much do people make from ordinals to pay $3,948 in 3 inputs and 2 output transaction?
Transaction: https://mempool.space/tx/9b603cd261483db175f60cdf31f5623300ed5036276919c7331e2a398d8d6fce

Quote from: LoyceV on April 14, 2024, 08:04:37 AM

Quote from: Synchronice on April 14, 2024, 07:18:11 AM

By the way, I just checked Binance's Bitcoin withdrawal fees and I am kinda confused. Withdrawal fee for Bitcoin (legacy) is 0.00025 BTC while the withdrawal fee for SegWit that's supposed to be nearly 40% lower, is 0.00062 BTC. Did I misunderstood something here or doesn't this make any sense?

Binance loves confusing users into accepting their own made-up token as Bitcoin. Charging more for SegWit looks like a way to increase profit from unsuspecting users:
Image loading...

(image source)

Yes, you are right, they love confusing their users. On their website they have published articles that says that SegWit has dropped transaction cost dramatically compared to Legacy and on their withdrawal page, they charge 2.5 times more for SegWit withdrawal. I have seen many cases where their BEP20 and BEP2 withdrawal options caused serious trouble for many people. This is an attempt done intentionally to mislead people. Binance is a very shady exchange. I am really surprised about why so many people invest in BNB. People are buying ordinals, buying BNBs, what a crazy world we live in.

LoyceV

legendary

Activity: 3290

Merit: 16489

Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021

Quote from: Synchronice on April 14, 2024, 07:18:11 AM

By the way, I just checked Binance's Bitcoin withdrawal fees and I am kinda confused. Withdrawal fee for Bitcoin (legacy) is 0.00025 BTC while the withdrawal fee for SegWit that's supposed to be nearly 40% lower, is 0.00062 BTC. Did I misunderstood something here or doesn't this make any sense?

Binance loves confusing users into accepting their own made-up token as Bitcoin. Charging more for SegWit looks like a way to increase profit from unsuspecting users:
Image loading...

(image source)

Synchronice

hero member

Activity: 784

Merit: 733

Watch Bitcoin Documentary - https://t.ly/v0Nim

Quote from: stompix on April 12, 2024, 08:56:06 AM

and in this you include people that don't mint ordinals, binance that pays 150sat/vb or Bitfinex that has no second thoughts on 469 sat/vb

So in the end, it takes little effort to clog the network, cause...you know...1MB is enough for everyone Wink

Binance owns pools, so they don't care about fees, high fee situation is very beneficial for them but I didn't know if Bitfinex was paying that much, as far as I can tell, they don't own any pool. It doesn't make any sense to me, why should anyone pay more than recommended. Slightly above recommended is okay but many people pay 30x and 40x over the recommended amount.

By the way, I just checked Binance's Bitcoin withdrawal fees and I am kinda confused. Withdrawal fee for Bitcoin (legacy) is 0.00025 BTC while the withdrawal fee for SegWit that's supposed to be nearly 40% lower, is 0.00062 BTC. Did I misunderstood something here or doesn't this make any sense?

NeuroticFish

legendary

Activity: 3500

Merit: 6205

Looking for campaign manager? Contact icopress!

Quote from: LoyceV on April 13, 2024, 10:04:54 AM

Maybe it's time to significantly raise the dust limit. This transaction creates more than 1000 dust inputs.

No. After reading the part I'll quote below (and I'll make some text bold to stand out), I think the correct approach (or at least one step in that direction) would be to make the P2TR output size be counted and limited to a reasonably small size.
The small detail about P2TR output size tells that Ordinals actually exploit a missing rule in Bitcoin.

Quote from: NotATether on April 04, 2024, 06:57:52 AM

As you can see in the script opcode, the push instructions are never evaluated. If they were, then all of these gigantic ordinals transactions would fail because they would overflow the stack. The manner in which the Ordinals transactions are spent is by using the conventional Schnorr signature directly, not any of the leaf evaluations. And also P2TR outputs do not count any sigops so its effectively limited only by block size, i.e. it's possible to fill an entire block with a large enough Ordinal.

Of course, we should also keep an eye on who is also spamming the blockchain. Maybe some service actively tracking and sorting all possible spam sources could get a good feedback from the community. (Yes, I know, it's easy to say/dream...)

ABCbits

legendary

Activity: 2842

Merit: 7333

Crypto Swap Exchange

Quote from: LoyceV on April 13, 2024, 10:04:54 AM

Quote from: NeuroticFish on April 13, 2024, 09:57:41 AM

is it indeed only one entity doing all the spam?!

I'm not sure, but it looks like it: exactly the same fee, exactly the same transaction, often using the previous outputs as inputs, and broadcasting them in batches.

Maybe it's time to significantly raise the dust limit. This transaction creates more than 1000 dust inputs.

Or maybe several people use same script/software which create TX with static or poor fee rate choice algorithm.

Quote from: LoyceV on April 13, 2024, 10:04:54 AM

Maybe it's time to significantly raise the dust limit. This transaction creates more than 1000 dust inputs.

I recall the dust limit was lowered from about 5460 satoshi to 546 satoshi some years ago, partially due to rising Bitcoin price. Unless Bitcoin price decline significantly, i don't expect dust limit will be raised.

LoyceV

legendary

Activity: 3290

Merit: 16489

Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021

Quote from: NeuroticFish on April 13, 2024, 09:57:41 AM

is it indeed only one entity doing all the spam?!

I'm not sure, but it looks like it: exactly the same fee, exactly the same transaction, often using the previous outputs as inputs, and broadcasting them in batches.

Maybe it's time to significantly raise the dust limit. This transaction creates more than 1000 dust inputs.

stompix

legendary

Activity: 2828

Merit: 6108

Jambler.io

Quote from: bitmover on April 13, 2024, 09:51:54 AM

I checked and I saw no rare satoshi in this address
https://magiceden.io/ordinals/discover-raresats?walletAddress=bc1pj54z06qh9pxhae09xw3mvrupzfppfgstfxvuhtt52t4fpgrvhs2qkmzqct

strange, he even overpaid fees.

It's minting brc-20 tokens
https://ordiscan.com/address/bc1pj54z06qh9pxhae09xw3mvrupzfppfgstfxvuhtt52t4fpgrvhs2qkmzqct
and it's related to these
https://ordiscan.com/address/bc1pvu6qnzpuyl6w3vmpuy79d6slplr7fyhan9wd476npjnf070wgn9s3uyjr2

Normally I wouldn't mention them since, well, just some addresses with inscriptions, there are thousands, but speaking of weird transactions, this one really made me curious, I mean, what the f is it actually doing?
https://mempool.space/tx/634a89b727cda93ddd10ea68dc08e7f17163444ee018881b4bf3fa98900bca02

Quote from: NeuroticFish on April 13, 2024, 09:37:22 AM

Afaik Bitcoin Knots (Luke-Jr's fork of Bitcoin Core?) already filters them. But I guess that it's "market share" is far too small to matter.

Just how his pool filters them but, money is what it counts, so 6 months and it's still just getting one exahash per day.
https://ocean.xyz/dashboard

NeuroticFish

legendary

Activity: 3500

Merit: 6205

Looking for campaign manager? Contact icopress!

Quote from: LoyceV on April 13, 2024, 09:44:38 AM

I wouldn't call it "arbitrary" if it's one person spamming the blockchain for so long. The reason I still think it's one person is because of the massive numbers of similar transactions that keep flooding the blockchain. If fees aren't enough to deter spammers, I'd like to bring back the "coin days destroyed" priority mechanism. But it's going to be difficult to get miners on board if it means less profit.

As I said, I don't know "all the data", is it indeed only one entity doing all the spam?!
But at the end, it goes to miners (and, as you said, let's not count on them because they're in only for the money) and maybe to community too.

I guess that the community can do wonders - from switching to a "filter on" wallet/node to actually putting pressure/convince the devs to this direction. But... is the community convinced? Imho it's not. Imho if we want to go on this direction we may need to start with properly exposing the wallets (and hopefully entities too) that are responsible for all this spammy mess.

It feels soooo like in the winter of 2017/2018...

Quote from: bitmover on April 13, 2024, 09:51:54 AM

I checked and I saw no rare satoshi in this address

So it's not Ordinals related after all? Interesting...

Topic: [Aug 2022] Mempool empty! Use this opportunity to Consolidate your small inputs! (Read 82841 times)