Pages:
Author

Topic: Huge increase in satoshidice spam over the past day - page 8. (Read 8875 times)

legendary
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1005
All your sad posts are making me sad now.

I suppose then, the best thing to do is find out how the free market copes with an exponentially increasing blockchain size.  It had to happen eventually anyway...
Bitcoin was actually doing fairly well and the chain size was only increasing at a moderate rate (largely DeepBit, which still refuses to use multisend, which would cut down on their volume by a ton) up until SatoshiDice.  Realistically, if satoshidice employed more sane methods of operation (multisend would be very easy and would have a pretty large impact on pure transaction volume, but really they should allow users to carry balance and withdraw when they want, the way pretty much every other bitcoin site does it) they would have a relatively tiny impact on the chain compared to what they have now.  The only reason the chain grows the way it does is because people like satoshi dice (and pretty much only satoshidice) refuse to put in an extra 10 minutes of coding time.

I suspect we'll see many more users move to a light client in the coming months.  I already removed the full satoshi client from all of my computers except one, simply because it really does take a toll on the machine it is on.
Running light nodes is the way the network is going anyway, and thats fine, but forcing everyone to do so purely because people are lazy and stupid is really poor.
Oh, come on, it's not forcing anybody!  It only encourages them.  Wink
hero member
Activity: 755
Merit: 515
All your sad posts are making me sad now.

I suppose then, the best thing to do is find out how the free market copes with an exponentially increasing blockchain size.  It had to happen eventually anyway...
Bitcoin was actually doing fairly well and the chain size was only increasing at a moderate rate (largely DeepBit, which still refuses to use multisend, which would cut down on their volume by a ton) up until SatoshiDice.  Realistically, if satoshidice employed more sane methods of operation (multisend would be very easy and would have a pretty large impact on pure transaction volume, but really they should allow users to carry balance and withdraw when they want, the way pretty much every other bitcoin site does it) they would have a relatively tiny impact on the chain compared to what they have now.  The only reason the chain grows the way it does is because people like satoshi dice (and pretty much only satoshidice) refuse to put in an extra 10 minutes of coding time.

I suspect we'll see many more users move to a light client in the coming months.  I already removed the full satoshi client from all of my computers except one, simply because it really does take a toll on the machine it is on.
Running light nodes is the way the network is going anyway, and thats fine, but forcing everyone to do so purely because people are lazy and stupid is really poor.
newbie
Activity: 23
Merit: 0
"So if you dont spend your coins in 96 hours you lose them?"

I knew my statement leading up to that was an issue as soon as I walked away from my computer...
hero member
Activity: 755
Merit: 515
Having the entire chain does more disservice than service to the bitcoin concept.  I would think that only the unconfirmed transactions would be in the chain..
That's the point of chain pruning, sadly chain pruning is only mostly feasible.
and the ones that don't confirm after 96 hours should roll off as well.
So if you dont spend your coins in 96 hours you lose them?
IMHO the chain should be used as a means to manage transactions and not as an audit trail.
Thats simply not the way bitcoin was designed.
legendary
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1005
All your sad posts are making me sad now.

I suppose then, the best thing to do is find out how the free market copes with an exponentially increasing blockchain size.  It had to happen eventually anyway...

I suspect we'll see many more users move to a light client in the coming months.  I already removed the full satoshi client from all of my computers except one, simply because it really does take a toll on the machine it is on.
newbie
Activity: 23
Merit: 0
Having the entire chain does more disservice than service to the bitcoin concept.  I would think that only the unconfirmed transactions would be in the chain..and the ones that don't confirm after 96 hours should roll off as well.  IMHO the chain should be used as a means to manage transactions and not as an audit trail.

Sierra
hero member
Activity: 755
Merit: 515
Best get started then!  Wink
Sadly, the most realistic way of doing it involves shipping chain snapshots as a part of the client download.  This introduces more trust in the decentralized network, which really isnt a good thing.  Hence why people are not eager to start working on chain pruning: many users will reject it.  Note that it also makes it very, very difficult for people to run old nodes (they wont sync properly), which in light of recent node statistic generation by luke, is looking like a very, very poor idea for network security.  In any case, chain pruning isnt coming soon as doing it really isnt pretty and could result in some pretty bad things for the network as a whole.
legendary
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1005
No, it is not time to start deprioritizing anything.  It is time to start prioritizing pruning of the blockchain.
Sadly, chain pruning is by no means easy.  Pruning the index of transactions (blkindex.dat) isnt hard, and is likely to be done in the next release or the release thereafter.  However, pruning blk0001.dat really can't be done without making pretty significant changes to the way bitcoin downloads blocks.
Best get started then!  Wink
hero member
Activity: 755
Merit: 515
No, it is not time to start deprioritizing anything.  It is time to start prioritizing pruning of the blockchain.
Sadly, chain pruning is by no means easy.  Pruning the index of transactions (blkindex.dat) isnt hard, and is likely to be done in the next release or the release thereafter.  However, pruning blk0001.dat really can't be done without making pretty significant changes to the way bitcoin downloads blocks.
legendary
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1005
No, it is not time to start deprioritizing anything.  It is time to start prioritizing pruning of the blockchain.
hero member
Activity: 755
Merit: 515
Paying a meaningful fee to miners has no effect on the thousands and thousands of bitcoin users who have to store the transactions on their disk...
legendary
Activity: 1246
Merit: 1016
Strength in numbers
SD pays a fee on all tx correct? What fee? Whatever it is x30000 seems meaningful.
legendary
Activity: 1204
Merit: 1015
And we have set a new record for us today.  We have had over 30,000 bets today and still a good chunk of an hour left in the day (GMT days).

Previous high was 19,000 on June 4th.
Shocked
hero member
Activity: 755
Merit: 515
Over the past ~24 hours, the number of satoshidice transactions has increased hugely, leading to transaction memory pools (currently) at around 9000 transactions.  Satoshidice spam is already a huge % of current transactions, but now its just ridiculous.  Is it time to start deprioritizing transactions which use very common addresses?
Pages:
Jump to: