Economically Unspendable Outputs: A Problem On The Radar - page 7.

tvbcof

legendary

Activity: 4690

Merit: 1276

Quote from: Elwar on March 09, 2013, 12:52:23 PM

Yes, let us focus on Satoshi Dice and make them change their ways so that we can ignore this "flaw".

Meanwhile, to drive the price down so someone can buy a bunch of BTC, they can flood the blockchain with tiny transactions and make it "bothersome" for miners.

I am not a miner and have not been following them, but has there been some huge uproar from the miners saying that they are super bothered by all of the tiny transactions? There are ASIC machines coming out that can do 60 MH/s, are they going to be worthless because of so much "dust"?

I have not seen a huge exodus of miners fed up with the amount of traffic.

Those actually mining are not 'peers' in the supposedly peer-2-peer system per-se. Transfer nodes are, and yes, there have been an exodus of these due to bloat and overhead. It is quite possible to render these almost completely outside of the reach of all non-commercial participants depending on how things evolve. How much of a problem that is depends on where one stands in the Bitcoin ecosystem from a philosophical and/or monetary investment standpoint.

justusranvier

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1013

Quote from: Luke-Jr on March 09, 2013, 01:04:11 PM

Do you have a solution to force miners to care about Bitcoin in the long-term?
I'm all for better solutions, but so far I've not heard any.

You could make it economical to clean up the mess, which is a better long term solution because it doesn't rely a constant arms race to filter out bad behaviour.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/dust-collection-150726

At least one client developer is willing to automatically clean up those unprunable dust transactions if the right incentives are in place.

Luke-Jr

legendary

Activity: 2576

Merit: 1186

Quote from: Elwar on March 09, 2013, 12:52:23 PM

Yes, let us focus on Satoshi Dice and make them change their ways so that we can ignore this "flaw".

The flaw is miners neglecting their job to filter out spam. Do you have a solution to force miners to care about Bitcoin in the long-term?
I'm all for better solutions, but so far I've not heard any.

Elwar

legendary

Activity: 3598

Merit: 2386

Viva Ut Vivas

Yes, let us focus on Satoshi Dice and make them change their ways so that we can ignore this "flaw".

Meanwhile, to drive the price down so someone can buy a bunch of BTC, they can flood the blockchain with tiny transactions and make it "bothersome" for miners.

I am not a miner and have not been following them, but has there been some huge uproar from the miners saying that they are super bothered by all of the tiny transactions? There are ASIC machines coming out that can do 60 MH/s, are they going to be worthless because of so much "dust"?

I have not seen a huge exodus of miners fed up with the amount of traffic.

tvbcof

legendary

Activity: 4690

Merit: 1276

Quote from: Mageant on March 09, 2013, 09:16:12 AM

I think this "problem" is only temproary will fix itself when the price for transactions go up.

This could happen when we start hitting the hard limit of 1 MB per block.

I think it still could be a problem if it is worth it to someone with deep pockets to attempt to destroy or manipulate Bitcoin at the expense of buying all or most of the transactions. (And man would such a bidding war between parties for whom money was little of no object would certainly be a windfall for miners.)

But, as I said, as long as the long-term damage from caked on dust is predictable and limited to a known and acceptable level I don't see this form of attack as a show-stopper issue. Floating or vastly increasing the block size would just make an attack of this nature cheaper and that much more likely to succeed. At least in causing long term damage to the Bitcoin solution.

edit: add missing word.

TooCasual

member

Activity: 114

Merit: 10

You can't be Serious?!?

Quote from: misterbigg on March 08, 2013, 11:52:11 AM

Quote from: evoorhees on March 08, 2013, 11:45:52 AM

Let's say I shut down SatoshiDice tomorrow

How about just not sending dust to notify losing bets?

+1. In a net shell. Why flood the network with shit? (Dust is just not a strong enough word) . It's a waste. Keep the fees make more BTC on the losing bets. Win-Win. As a miner/user that's my vote.

TC

misterbigg

legendary

Activity: 1064

Merit: 1001

Quote from: SalvorHardin on March 09, 2013, 12:11:19 PM

Quote from: misterbigg on March 09, 2013, 11:40:59 AM

Okay so there has been considerable improvement?

If you want my honest opinion, unfortunately no. In fact, I expect the betting with Satoshi Dice may pick up in the short term since SD has effectively reduce the edge for the house, i.e. net payoffs to the gamblers has increased. So instead of 1.9% edge for the house, those who bet the minimum amount now only have to deal with a 1.4% house edge, if SD does not lower the payoff of a winning bet in future.

You will notice that the betting with SD has actually slow down/stablize despite recent influx of new Bitcoin users. So by increasing the payoff of losing bets, it has slightly reduce house's edge, and this may renew gambler's interest, as gamblers always love a low house edge.

Of course, not having to deal with thousands of unspendable 1 satoshi input is a big improvement for the gamblers and miners.

Alright well, let's recognize that there are two problems here:

1) Increased S.DICE transaction volume without a corresponding increase in Bitcoin adoption (likely due to bots)

2) Economically unviable transaction outputs which cost more to send than the amount they transmit

As far as #1 goes there is little that we can do about it, and there is a strong argument to be made that we shouldn't do anything about it. Eventually Bitcoin will have to handle this volume anyway. The problem is that it is driving up fees sooner than expected, which could dampen Bitcoin growth. In the short term this is the bigger problem.

But #2 is the larger long term problem, because the outputs are unprunable and they will incur an ongoing storage cost for all full nodes.

It sounds like #2 has been addressed is this the case?

SalvorHardin

member

Activity: 72

Merit: 10

Quote from: misterbigg on March 09, 2013, 11:40:59 AM

Okay so there has been considerable improvement?

If you want my honest opinion, unfortunately no. In fact, I expect the betting with Satoshi Dice may pick up in the short term since SD has effectively reduce the edge for the house, i.e. net payoffs to the gamblers has increased. So instead of 1.9% edge for the house, those who bet the minimum amount now only have to deal with a 1.4% house edge, if SD does not lower the payoff of a winning bet in future.

You will notice that the betting with SD has actually slow down/stablize despite recent influx of new Bitcoin users. So by increasing the payoff of losing bets, it has slightly reduce house's edge, and this may renew gambler's interest, as gamblers always love a low house edge.

Of course, not having to deal with thousands of unspendable 1 satoshi input is a big improvement for the gamblers and miners.

misterbigg

legendary

Activity: 1064

Merit: 1001

Okay so there has been considerable improvement?

SalvorHardin

member

Activity: 72

Merit: 10

Quote from: misterbigg on March 09, 2013, 10:36:22 AM

Quote from: SalvorHardin on March 09, 2013, 09:48:51 AM

This is a re-post of my comment from the other thread.

I am not sure why no one has mentioned it here. But starting today, Satoshi dice already changed its method of sending out 1 satoshi for confirming losing bet. Instead, they are now sending out 0.5% of bet amount back for losing bets, regardless of bet size. Given that minimum bet is 0.01 BTC, now all Satoshi Dice losing bet tx starts at 5000 satoshi and up. I presume that SD changed its policy due to the introduction of SD filter patch.

Therefore, Satoshi Dice now absorbs all tx fee, and return 0.5% of bet amount, even for minimum bet. Previously, it will deduct a tx fee first and send you 1 satoshi. So you need to bet at least 0.2 BTC or so, to get 0.5 mbtc back. But now even 0.01 BTC minimum bet gives you at least 5000 satoshi back. I presume the change is made today because of all the heat and the patch here.

Hallelujah!!! Can you point me to a tx in the Blockchain and help me understand the outputs and how to verify this? For example:

https://blockchain.info/tx/6e0092ec8abca3ec3df5edbdf4c759024554d8e43c2f1956a3248fe1e6e664f6

Is this a new losing bet confirmation?

FYI 5,000 Satoshi is still considered dust by developers.

Yes, that's a good example of new losing bet confirmation. There are plenty more at SD's website under Results or Unconfirmed. You can observe the betting action of the owner of your tx sample https://blockchain.info/address/12AKJqjcwX85gaV4veHQFm4ZbsWD1hNPPAf. Notice how SD is now confirming losing bet by sending back a flat 0.5% of bet amount, without any fees deducted upfront.

As for 0.01 BTC size bet, they are typical for the really low odd bet like "less than 1". But most of SD action is taking place in the 48% to 50%, with some in the 24% and 36%. So most of betting size are larger than 0.01 BTC. Though obviously people who run bots or martingales would still use 0.01 BTC as standard starting bet, but typically the tx fees would simply kill you over time except for those betting on the really low odd bet, like "less than 1".

misterbigg

legendary

Activity: 1064

Merit: 1001

Quote from: SalvorHardin on March 09, 2013, 09:48:51 AM

This is a re-post of my comment from the other thread.

I am not sure why no one has mentioned it here. But starting today, Satoshi dice already changed its method of sending out 1 satoshi for confirming losing bet. Instead, they are now sending out 0.5% of bet amount back for losing bets, regardless of bet size. Given that minimum bet is 0.01 BTC, now all Satoshi Dice losing bet tx starts at 5000 satoshi and up. I presume that SD changed its policy due to the introduction of SD filter patch.

Therefore, Satoshi Dice now absorbs all tx fee, and return 0.5% of bet amount, even for minimum bet. Previously, it will deduct a tx fee first and send you 1 satoshi. So you need to bet at least 0.2 BTC or so, to get 0.5 mbtc back. But now even 0.01 BTC minimum bet gives you at least 5000 satoshi back. I presume the change is made today because of all the heat and the patch here.

Hallelujah!!! Can you point me to a tx in the Blockchain and help me understand the outputs and how to verify this? For example:

https://blockchain.info/tx/6e0092ec8abca3ec3df5edbdf4c759024554d8e43c2f1956a3248fe1e6e664f6

Is this a new losing bet confirmation?

FYI 5,000 Satoshi is still considered dust by developers.

misterbigg

legendary

Activity: 1064

Merit: 1001

Quote from: Peter Lambert on March 09, 2013, 08:49:19 AM

People talk about "old" coins, and "aging" coins, to avoid a fee, but what is the actual meaning of "old"? How long do they have to sit, is it a coupe blocks, a couple days, a couple weeks?

It's based on the number of blocks. I'm not sure about the actual number but I think it's on the order of weeks. The reason that age matters is to prevent relay spam where someone just transfers one satoshi back and forth between two addresses without a fee.

Sukrim

legendary

Activity: 2618

Merit: 1007

Quote from: Soros Shorts on March 09, 2013, 09:59:40 AM

Also if you are worried about performance problems, I would bet that by then the ALU in your watch can do native 1024-bit int arithmetic operations.

How much are you willing to bet and whom are you allowing to escrow this? I'd go with up to 10 BTC against this statement, if it is formulated properly. Your move!

Soros Shorts

donator

Activity: 1617

Merit: 1012

Quote from: Sukrim on March 09, 2013, 06:54:50 AM

This requires a hard fork, if you create more than 3 additional digits (smallest unit is 1/100th of a nBTC) you overflow an 64bit int and once this is necessary, I guess there are a LOT of other problems first.

If you plan for it now to happen in 20 years it does not need to be a hard fork if 99.9% of the clients have been updated to expect it. It is not as though there is a current need for something smaller than a Satoshi. Also if you are worried about performance problems, I would bet that by then the ALU in your watch can do native 1024-bit int arithmetic operations.

Come-from-Beyond

legendary

Activity: 2142

Merit: 1009

Newbie

Quote from: conspirosphere.tk on March 09, 2013, 09:46:33 AM

Quote from: Come-from-Beyond on March 09, 2013, 09:31:05 AM

I'm afraid Bitcoin #1 is already dead. The only questions we should discuss:

1. How long can we pretend that everything OK?
2. What is the plan for moving on to Bitcoin #2?

3. When its price is going to crash? Deads in the water didn't use to be so expensive.

When? When most of traders realize that Bitcoin has a serious flaw.

SalvorHardin

member

Activity: 72

Merit: 10

This is a re-post of my comment from the other thread.

I am not sure why no one has mentioned it here. But starting today, Satoshi dice already changed its method of sending out 1 satoshi for confirming losing bet. Instead, they are now sending out 0.5% of bet amount back for losing bets, regardless of bet size. Given that minimum bet is 0.01 BTC, now all Satoshi Dice losing bet tx starts at 5000 satoshi and up. I presume that SD changed its policy due to the introduction of SD filter patch.

Therefore, Satoshi Dice now absorbs all tx fee, and return 0.5% of bet amount, even for minimum bet. Previously, it will deduct a tx fee first and send you 1 satoshi. So you need to bet at least 0.2 BTC or so, to get 0.5 mbtc back. But now even 0.01 BTC minimum bet gives you at least 5000 satoshi back. I presume the change is made today because of all the heat and the patch here.

conspirosphere.tk

legendary

Activity: 2352

Merit: 1064

Bitcoin is antisemitic

Quote from: Come-from-Beyond on March 09, 2013, 09:31:05 AM

I'm afraid Bitcoin #1 is already dead. The only questions we should discuss:

1. How long can we pretend that everything OK?
2. What is the plan for moving on to Bitcoin #2?

3. When its price is going to crash? Deads in the water didn't use to be so expensive.

Come-from-Beyond

legendary

Activity: 2142

Merit: 1009

Newbie

Quote

Newly Discovered Flaw, Could KILL Bitcoin!

I'm afraid Bitcoin #1 is already dead. The only questions we should discuss:

1. How long can we pretend that everything OK?
2. What is the plan for moving on to Bitcoin #2?

crazy_rabbit

legendary

Activity: 1204

Merit: 1002

RUM AND CARROTS: A PIRATE LIFE FOR ME

Won't the problem solve itself when 1 bitcoin is worth 1 million dollars and that tiny little bit of transaction "spam" suddenly becomes very valuable, and miners lower fees in competition to handle the vast bitcoin traffic?

Mageant

legendary

Activity: 1145

Merit: 1001

I think this "problem" is only temproary will fix itself when the price for transactions go up.

This could happen when we start hitting the hard limit of 1 MB per block.

Topic: Economically Unspendable Outputs: A Problem On The Radar - page 7. (Read 16467 times)