Pages:
Author

Topic: Mempool fees and Solutions - page 3. (Read 1221 times)

hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 792
Watch Bitcoin Documentary - https://t.ly/v0Nim
December 21, 2023, 07:09:08 AM
#53
It's not miners' fault if people are willing to pay 60 times and 100 times higher transaction fees than recommended.
Sometimes these things is because of broken implementations that suggest much higher fees and in some cases there are malicious fee estimation websites that intentionally suggest a ridiculously high fee rate.
I know there is a moment when errors happen because of wrong suggestions but to my mind, this is bullshit in this case but I'll be frank and say that I don't understand the real motives either. Imagine you have send $18,000 and Electrum or malicious fee estimator suggest you to pay $6400 in transaction fees, let's be frank, would any human say: okay, these are recommended fees, let's pay $6400 and send my coins. No one will do that if they don't get back more, that's why I lose my mind, can't figure out why that happens with 100% confidence.

If you remember the situation before the Ordinals Attack began, you can see that the 4 MB weight was enough to handle the real demand. But after the spam attack began, the fees started going up and stayed up.
In other words the problem isn't the block space.
I haven't seen blocks higher than 2MB on mempool.space
By the way, ordinals make me laugh. The existence of Bitcoin ordinals is not a problem but it's a problem that people pay tons of money to buy them. People pay so much money in pixelated bullshit that tens of thousands of people every day pay enormously high transaction fees to create ordinals as soon as possible. In other words, dumb people create dumb problems. Block size increase or ordinals ban can't decrease the number of dumb people, they need a better education. This is sarcasm for sure!
hero member
Activity: 714
Merit: 1298
December 21, 2023, 06:27:24 AM
#52

And many of the gamblers don't know they are wasting time and money either,

Ordinals and other similar stuff developers are trying to  piggyback off of Bitcoin  success and utilize its brand in BLT. Boneheads, dazzled by  brand, are buying that junk  in the hope to make money on it. Miners are doing their job and secure network. They are the only players in the field who can not be blamed.  As the matter of fact one can view the current situation as the  stress test scenario for the future development when after two or three upcoming halving the fee must reach a level high enough to be the only incentive for miners .
legendary
Activity: 2730
Merit: 7065
December 21, 2023, 03:08:49 AM
#51
Yes, but there are still some major differences too.
For example remember your own first days with bitcoin. How many transactions did you make in first week or first month? 1? 10? Multiply that with 100k new users and it still wouldn't be as many transactions per minute as the spam attacks inject into the mempool. There are currently 340k transactions in the mempool.
Bitcoin now is easier to use than what it was in the beginning. You have a lot of more software and hardware alternatives. You have loads of exchanges. It's easier to find information and tutorials on how to start than 10+ years ago. Chances are that you know someone who introduced you to the technology who can show you how to begin. In our time, it was new to everyone and the information was limited.

I am very much against the Ordinals spam, but how to get rid of it or at least minimize it without applying censorship? Regardless of the negative opinions on Ordinals, Bitcoin wouldn't be a censorship-resistant blockchain if you censored and forbid Ordinals. Are they breaking any consensus rules? No. If they did, the transactions would be rejected and wouldn't find their way into legit blocks. So, the blockchain functions the way it's supposed to. Sadly, they are playing by the rules. I would like to emphasize that, sadly. I didn't follow closely the entire issue of Ocean mining pool and what they did recently. But their attempt to stop Ordinals resulted in tagging Samourai Whirlpool transactions as irregular as well. That's censorship.       
legendary
Activity: 3472
Merit: 10611
December 20, 2023, 11:43:57 PM
#50
This Ordinals spam is a good example of how a huge influx of new users could look like.
Yes, but there are still some major differences too.
For example remember your own first days with bitcoin. How many transactions did you make in first week or first month? 1? 10? Multiply that with 100k new users and it still wouldn't be as many transactions per minute as the spam attacks inject into the mempool. There are currently 340k transactions in the mempool.
legendary
Activity: 2730
Merit: 7065
December 20, 2023, 06:37:07 AM
#49
With attacks like this it would not be that hard for someone with unlimited funds like gov. to make bitcoin almost unusable for most people  Tongue
You might have meant it as a joke but it's not. The enemies of Bitcoin can't easily attack the decentralized ledger reproduced across tens of thousands of computers. They also can't easily attack and put out of business the thousands of mining companies and small-time home miners. What they can do is exactly what you said: attack the value transfer. Make it difficult and expensive to use Bitcoin and then fud, through their media, what a waste of time and resources Bitcoin is.

Maybe it's time for another fork, and more people need to use Lightning Network for small transactions.
Doesn't really help much because you still need to open and fund the channel and close it eventually. Both are on-chain transactions and require those currently expensive on-chain fees.
legendary
Activity: 2212
Merit: 7064
December 20, 2023, 05:13:46 AM
#48
If you remember the situation before the Ordinals Attack began, you can see that the 4 MB weight was enough to handle the real demand. But after the spam attack began, the fees started going up and stayed up.
In other words the problem isn't the block space.
Exactly, and I am sure the situation would be exactly the same with bigger block.
It sucks to have high transaction fees like they are right now, with over 500 sat/vB that is over $30 worth of Bitcoin and your transaction may still be with low priority.
With attacks like this it would not be that hard for someone with unlimited funds like gov. to make bitcoin almost unusable for most people  Tongue
Maybe it's time for another fork, and more people need to use Lightning Network for small transactions.
legendary
Activity: 2730
Merit: 7065
December 20, 2023, 02:36:38 AM
#47
If you remember the situation before the Ordinals Attack began, you can see that the 4 MB weight was enough to handle the real demand. But after the spam attack began, the fees started going up and stayed up.
In other words the problem isn't the block space.
That's true. However, it's the current demand. But if Bitcoin is to have many more users globally, it needs to be able to handle the load. This Ordinals spam is a good example of how a huge influx of new users could look like. The results are unsatisfactory. The solutions are unsatisfactory as well. Telling everyone just use the Lightning Network and it will be fine is like sweeping the problems under the carpet.
legendary
Activity: 3472
Merit: 10611
December 19, 2023, 01:02:06 AM
#46
It's not miners' fault if people are willing to pay 60 times and 100 times higher transaction fees than recommended.
Sometimes these things is because of broken implementations that suggest much higher fees and in some cases there are malicious fee estimation websites that intentionally suggest a ridiculously high fee rate.
There are also cases where the user wants to get their transaction confirmed with 100% certainty so they go overboard with the fee rate and pay a very high one so that if there were a spike between the time they broadcast and their tx is confirmed, they are still paying a high rate.
There is also this new case with the spam attack where newbies are participating in the Ordinals Attack and they don't mind paying a ton of fees because they are hoping to earn a profit on the garbage they dump on each other.

Quote
I think that number of bitcoin transactions are very high and 1 MB blocksize doesn't meet the modern demand but on anther hand, here you have people who are willing to pay thousands in trash.
If you remember the situation before the Ordinals Attack began, you can see that the 4 MB weight was enough to handle the real demand. But after the spam attack began, the fees started going up and stayed up.
In other words the problem isn't the block space.
hero member
Activity: 994
Merit: 1089
December 17, 2023, 05:05:42 PM
#45
The situation today is worse. Miners have found an opportunity to collect more Bitcoin before the next split occurs, and as long as prices remain above $30,000, they will be happy for these high fees to continue.
Miners wouldn't say no to more money. With this hike in tx fees, miners now even earn as high as 3 BTC in tx fees for a mined block, look at block 821669 mined by Antpool mining pool, they earned 3.874 BTC in tx fees alone, and 10.124 in fees + Subsidy, that is how high miners are earning because of ordinals.
and if this problem persists, it will be difficult to return to 1-2 satoshi, which is harmful to adoption in the long term.
It is already harming adoption right now, with how high the fee rate is, nobody is going to use BTC as a payment method or spend it especially for micro payment, it is sad to say but that is the reality.
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 792
Watch Bitcoin Documentary - https://t.ly/v0Nim
December 17, 2023, 06:52:02 AM
#44
The situation today is worse. Miners have found an opportunity to collect more Bitcoin before the next split occurs, and as long as prices remain above $30,000, they will be happy for these high fees to continue. Therefore, I expect a correction to occur soon, but I do not think that this is the problem, but rather that people are accustomed to 10-50 sat/vB is a cheap fee, and if this problem persists, it will be difficult to return to 1-2 satoshi, which is harmful to adoption in the long term.


It's not miners' fault if people are willing to pay 60 times and 100 times higher transaction fees than recommended.
Check these transactions and tell me, what do you think, why did they pay so high transaction fees?
TX1 https://mempool.space/tx/abd0372aaaac6392eb5be258dcf282ffc152b9fd99a75945342be84416c93b36
TX2 https://mempool.space/tx/0cef268fff70c605dd91a00586d4edefc00ea47fc3c38500c67692aea8f6e9c9
TX3 https://mempool.space/tx/8a199391385b767b3923f8005012d7ab7fce66e78bc9ca302db2e6bd6bf730ff

I personally can't understand why do some people pay 100x times more than what's recommended by mempool. I see no point in sending $20 000 and paying $15 000 in transaction fees. I think that number of bitcoin transactions are very high and 1 MB blocksize doesn't meet the modern demand but on anther hand, here you have people who are willing to pay thousands in trash. If people have so much money that they don't know how to spend it, no block size and nothing can stop them from it. I really don't know what to think after seeing how people pay up to 100x more than recommended. Doesn't it affect their budget? Cheesy It's curious.
legendary
Activity: 2702
Merit: 4002
December 17, 2023, 05:25:41 AM
#43
The situation today is worse. Miners have found an opportunity to collect more Bitcoin before the next split occurs, and as long as prices remain above $30,000, they will be happy for these high fees to continue. Therefore, I expect a correction to occur soon, but I do not think that this is the problem, but rather that people are accustomed to 10-50 sat/vB is a cheap fee, and if this problem persists, it will be difficult to return to 1-2 satoshi, which is harmful to adoption in the long term.

legendary
Activity: 2730
Merit: 7065
December 17, 2023, 03:40:03 AM
#42
I couldn't believe the state of the mempools when I checked last night to see if the situation calmed down a bit because of the weekend. But I noticed that you needed to pay between 300 and 400 sat/vByte for a possible next-block confirmation. It's just insane what the banana monkey fanboys have created and done with the network. It's difficult to talk about a normally functioning blockchain if you need to pay a $20 BTC equivalent fee to send $10 worth of bitcoin. I can't believe I am saying this, but I hope they find a solution to what is now a problem.
hero member
Activity: 994
Merit: 1089
December 16, 2023, 09:56:52 AM
#41
And if the transaction fee persists, it will affect businesses very badly. Because nobody like to do a business and loss it in. Mostly people that are involved in small scale transactions. I was thinking that before this year will end the fee will come back to normalcy but things are getting worse. There should be a solution to this problem by Satoshi and his co developers.
This is the reality right now and a lot of people are going to avoid using BTC as a payment method right now, it is sad when you think about it, because BTC is a p2p electronic cash, and it was created to be used for payments. Using the BTC network for micro payments is almost impossible right now and i don't think businesses that accept BTC would be getting many customers who want to pay in BTC. As for a solution, it is not as easy as you think, first of all, it must be one that isn't pro-censorship because the network is censorship resistant. I don't have the skills to suggest a solution, but i will support one that falls under the 'principles' of the BTC network.
hero member
Activity: 2156
Merit: 803
Top Crypto Casino
December 16, 2023, 09:01:02 AM
#40
I thought the fee has reduced to some extent when I made a transaction last week but seeing it very high this week marvel me. That the high transaction fee will not just go off like that. I know it will reduce but at this time it will take some time. I tried to make a transaction of 0.001 today and the fee is unusual and the transaction fee was 0.000186 which is equivalent to $7.84 and the fee rate is 129.2 sat/vb so I have to give up the transaction for now till further notice. And if the transaction fee persists, it will affect businesses very badly. Because nobody like to do a business and loss it in. Mostly people that are involved in small scale transactions. I was thinking that before this year will end the fee will come back to normalcy but things are getting worse. There should be a solution to this problem by Satoshi and his co developers.

Currently, the transaction fees are beyond 312 sat/vB and it might continue in the same manner for god knows how many days. For small transactions, it is better to use the LN as a $20 transaction with a high priority fee is now $18.51. Small businesses would be affected by such fees, they won't be able to sustain such insane fees for the long term and would go for alternate options. The problem is with the hype that is being created by Binance whenever they announce they would be listing an Ordinals on their exchange. They recently listed this meme coin 1000SATS and it has been pumping after listing creating congestion in the network.
legendary
Activity: 1022
Merit: 1341
December 16, 2023, 02:08:55 AM
#39
I thought the fee has reduced to some extent when I made a transaction last week but seeing it very high this week marvel me. That the high transaction fee will not just go off like that. I know it will reduce but at this time it will take some time. I tried to make a transaction of 0.001 today and the fee is unusual and the transaction fee was 0.000186 which is equivalent to $7.84 and the fee rate is 129.2 sat/vb so I have to give up the transaction for now till further notice. And if the transaction fee persists, it will affect businesses very badly. Because nobody like to do a business and loss it in. Mostly people that are involved in small scale transactions. I was thinking that before this year will end the fee will come back to normalcy but things are getting worse. There should be a solution to this problem by Satoshi and his co developers.
legendary
Activity: 3472
Merit: 10611
December 01, 2023, 10:54:20 PM
#38
The sha-256 is at a disadvantage to scrypt
1 block to 12 block
It is not SHA256 that finds 1 block per 10 minutes on average and Scrypt finding 12. It is the Proof of Work algorithm and more specifically how difficulty and difficulty adjustment is setup in the cryptocurrency that uses these algorithms under the hood. Otherwise there are shitcoins (copies of bitcoin) out there using SHA256 and producing more blocks per minute that bitcoin does per 10 minutes on average.
legendary
Activity: 4256
Merit: 8551
'The right to privacy matters'
December 01, 2023, 07:27:31 PM
#37
it behoves Scrypt to clog btc block chain so that people will say fuck it I WILL send it in LTC

I don't say you are wrong. It makes a lot of sense.
I will say something else though: in 2013/2014 I was into Dogecoin. I was thinking that Bitcoin is too expensive, I've lost the train and Dogecoin makes a lot more sense as every day currency. After Mintpal went down I've left Dogecoin and after a few small stops in other altcoins I've settled for Bitcoin. We are in December 2024 and afaik Dogecoin still has almost 0 usage as currency (and this compared to Bitcoin, not USD). Maybe LTc stands better, I don't know. Still... something has to change, I don't know what, to get to that change of perspective. Until then, Bitcoin seems to "take it all" (well, I know it's not all, but I think that you know what I mean), no matter the costs.

I can understand why btc wants to just flat out win it all so to speak.

They do have way more wealth and more mining gear. ⚙️

I wish I could live to see 2060 and how it played out.

It would be nice to be 23 right now. I would only be 60 in 2060.
legendary
Activity: 3668
Merit: 6382
Looking for campaign manager? Contact icopress!
December 01, 2023, 08:51:33 AM
#36
it behoves Scrypt to clog btc block chain so that people will say fuck it I WILL send it in LTC

I don't say you are wrong. It makes a lot of sense.
I will say something else though: in 2013/2014 I was into Dogecoin. I was thinking that Bitcoin is too expensive, I've lost the train and Dogecoin makes a lot more sense as every day currency. After Mintpal went down I've left Dogecoin and after a few small stops in other altcoins I've settled for Bitcoin. We are in December 2024 and afaik Dogecoin still has almost 0 usage as currency (and this compared to Bitcoin, not USD). Maybe LTc stands better, I don't know. Still... something has to change, I don't know what, to get to that change of perspective. Until then, Bitcoin seems to "take it all" (well, I know it's not all, but I think that you know what I mean), no matter the costs.
legendary
Activity: 4256
Merit: 8551
'The right to privacy matters'
December 01, 2023, 08:41:51 AM
#35
Maybe I'm exaggerating, but it is for the good. I'm pretty confident we can fight this Ordinal wave of transactions by just setting these as non-standard (without even invalidating them on a protocol level with softfork). I doubt there will still be demand, but what if there is? We frequently notice people who are obsessed with the idea of injecting their data in the blockchain.

I'm generally opposed with ideas that delay the problems instead of solving them. That's probably why I'm in favor of developing second layer solutions instead of just messing with the block size limit. Same applies for Ordinals, more or less. If you impose a tapscript size limit, or any other such, for the sole reason of delaying Ordinals, then I'll oppose it.

I agree that certain limitations are necessary.

I'm not sure how would this fix the issue (or make the Ordinals speculators less interested in bitcoin network, which is a powerful name), but I see we are no longer that far away as ideas/direction, so I'm fine with your conclusion, for now. And if the issue remains for too long (which is never clear what it means), the community can think on a good solution.
After all, all I can do is emit ideas and hope for the best...
And after all it was a good talk. Thank you.

quite frankly you are deciding it has no value.

who the fuck are you to do that?

I say this in the spirit of friendship not meanness.

I hated Andy Warhol's Campbell soup series back in the 60's I was a kid but I used to go to the metropolitan museum of art often as a family outing. I liked the Italian Renaissance painter and realism. I thought Warhol was trash and garbage.

Pretty loft opinions for a 10 year old Italian American from Brooklyn.

Well I turned out to be completely wrong about Andy Warhol.

So in that spirit I am just saying who the fuck are you or who the fuck is anyone to say it will be worthless in the year 2056 or 2066.

I am just saying what I think. Maybe I am wrong, I've never claimed to be perfect.
And yes, you are right, they can become of value (especially historic value) after some (imho rather long) time. But in my defense, I strongly believe that most of these buyers hope to get rich in 5 years or less (but again, I may be wrong, I didn't conduct a study).

Imho paying 1$, or maybe 10$ for a lottery ticker is more than fine. But if somebody pays thousands... hmmm... in my head that doesn't feel right.

Sorry if my words offended or disappointed you or anybody...

PS. Art's beauty and value are very complicated to decide, and all can change over time due to personal experience(s); at least on that we're on the same page. Just I would not be so eager to put NFS in the same jar with the more traditional art.

Back to the real issue. Scrypt makes 12 blocks every 10 minutes sha256 makes 1

so LTC/Doge are 12x better to move small moves.

ordinals may be how they are doing this now. They will find other ways to do it later.

the 12x to 1 volume advantage is not being addressed which is why ordinals are doing a job at the moment.

You mean/propose moving ordinals to another blockchain? That could be a nice thing as transport/storage, but I don't think that will be coming soon: Bitcoin is a strong name and a powerful advertising. Maybe even the expectations the ordinals will stop working on bitcoin network after a while could make some consider them a good investment?!

The sha-256 is at a disadvantage to scrypt

1 block to 12 block

and what ever btc does as 2nd layer scrypt can copy

so scrypt will be able to do 12x the volume basically always better for small sends

it is what it is.

ie the sky is blue
and gravity works
the sun is yellow
it rises and it sets on a 24 hour basis.

So every time Btc tries to steal small transactions from scrypt chains

scrypt will need to fight back

right now scrypt earns over 1.2 million every day
and btc earns over over 33 million every day.

btc is wasting time and money trying to chase down scrypt for small transactions.

btc makes LN
ltc makes LN

it behoves Scrypt to clog btc block chain so that people will say fuck it I WILL send it in LTC


https://mempool.jhoenicke.de/#BTC,24h,fee

at the moment there are around 25 btc in fees in the mempool

A player  can load the blockchain with btc from 1 sat to 10 sats for about 10 btc.

I do not need ordinals to spend it and I don’t spend it since they never confirm.


Plus if i cut a deal with foundry or if I am foundry if they do spend I get 33% of them back.

if you want to fix this just concede no sends of

0.00001000 or less
no fee of
0.00000100 or less

and encourage

scrypt as the small value send.

if you are a btc max guy

Stop.🛑

I simply think the war of btc max guys against scrypt is a waste of effort and money.

but I certainly am a fan of btc for large value.


today I purchased a collectible for 0.0015 btc with shipping 0.00168226

fee was 0.00008

total spent was 0.00176xx

if i was allowed to pay with ltc my fee of 0.0008 btc which is $3.00 and change would have been under 20cents

I deliberately won this collectible to be able to write posts like this.

competing a 3 dollar fee against 20 cents is a long term losing game.



legendary
Activity: 3668
Merit: 6382
Looking for campaign manager? Contact icopress!
December 01, 2023, 08:25:23 AM
#34
Maybe I'm exaggerating, but it is for the good. I'm pretty confident we can fight this Ordinal wave of transactions by just setting these as non-standard (without even invalidating them on a protocol level with softfork). I doubt there will still be demand, but what if there is? We frequently notice people who are obsessed with the idea of injecting their data in the blockchain.

I'm generally opposed with ideas that delay the problems instead of solving them. That's probably why I'm in favor of developing second layer solutions instead of just messing with the block size limit. Same applies for Ordinals, more or less. If you impose a tapscript size limit, or any other such, for the sole reason of delaying Ordinals, then I'll oppose it.

I agree that certain limitations are necessary.

I'm not sure how would this fix the issue (or make the Ordinals speculators less interested in bitcoin network, which is a powerful name), but I see we are no longer that far away as ideas/direction, so I'm fine with your conclusion, for now. And if the issue remains for too long (which is never clear what it means), the community can think on a good solution.
After all, all I can do is emit ideas and hope for the best...
And after all it was a good talk. Thank you.

quite frankly you are deciding it has no value.

who the fuck are you to do that?

I say this in the spirit of friendship not meanness.

I hated Andy Warhol's Campbell soup series back in the 60's I was a kid but I used to go to the metropolitan museum of art often as a family outing. I liked the Italian Renaissance painter and realism. I thought Warhol was trash and garbage.

Pretty loft opinions for a 10 year old Italian American from Brooklyn.

Well I turned out to be completely wrong about Andy Warhol.

So in that spirit I am just saying who the fuck are you or who the fuck is anyone to say it will be worthless in the year 2056 or 2066.

I am just saying what I think. Maybe I am wrong, I've never claimed to be perfect.
And yes, you are right, they can become of value (especially historic value) after some (imho rather long) time. But in my defense, I strongly believe that most of these buyers hope to get rich in 5 years or less (but again, I may be wrong, I didn't conduct a study).

Imho paying 1$, or maybe 10$ for a lottery ticker is more than fine. But if somebody pays thousands... hmmm... in my head that doesn't feel right.

Sorry if my words offended or disappointed you or anybody...

PS. Art's beauty and value are very complicated to decide, and all can change over time due to personal experience(s); at least on that we're on the same page. Just I would not be so eager to put NFS in the same jar with the more traditional art.

Back to the real issue. Scrypt makes 12 blocks every 10 minutes sha256 makes 1

so LTC/Doge are 12x better to move small moves.

ordinals may be how they are doing this now. They will find other ways to do it later.

the 12x to 1 volume advantage is not being addressed which is why ordinals are doing a job at the moment.

You mean/propose moving ordinals to another blockchain? That could be a nice thing as transport/storage, but I don't think that will be coming soon: Bitcoin is a strong name and a powerful advertising. Maybe even the expectations the ordinals will stop working on bitcoin network after a while could make some consider them a good investment?!
Pages:
Jump to: