Mempool Observer Topic - page 32. | Bitcointalksearch.org

stompix

legendary

Activity: 2912

Merit: 6403

Blackjack.fun

Quote from: BlackHatCoiner on June 08, 2024, 10:29:41 AM

I can't help but notice that you keep repeating the same argument about Dogecoin. Dogecoin does not have a hard cap. There will always be a subsidy, and therefore, transaction fees do not have to be high. In here it's different.

I keep saying doge to highlight the irony in this.
When fees are too much the first option is to use...the such wow much coin meme shitcoin!
But, be my guest LTC:
Avg. Transaction Fee   0.000033 LTC ($0.0026) 0.00000019 LTC/byte
Transactions last 24h
(Number of transactions in blockchain per day)   637,738

hmmm...
BTC
Median Transaction Fee   0.000084 BTC ($5.82) 17.2 sats/vB
Transactions last 24h
(Number of transactions in blockchain per day)   413,427

You were a fan of comparing those, right? Grin

Quote from: BlackHatCoiner on June 08, 2024, 10:29:41 AM

That's only possible with gigabytes of block size, and the assumption that the demand for on-chain transactions will skyrocket accordingly, for if it won't, the system's days are numbered.

Seriously, stop portraying your assumptions and views of something as FACTS!

Findingnemo

hero member

Activity: 2366

Merit: 793

Bitcoin = Financial freedom

Quote from: BlackHatCoiner on June 08, 2024, 12:30:58 PM

Quote from: Findingnemo on June 08, 2024, 10:45:58 AM

So what's the possible solution other than increasing the block size which has be rejected by the community all the time when it's proposed and I am not going to say LN is the way either cause it's just a temporary solution

Scalability will emerge from sufficient transaction compression. This could mean to have multiple bidirectional channels within just one UTXO. To achieve this, we need to introduce a kind of script program called covenant. It requires a softfork, and softforks usually take a lot of time to activate and get sufficient support. These are the kind of L2 which cannot be implemented currently, i.e. Ark.

I took my time to read the proposal which seems like a good idea but yet to understand it completely. If this soft fork is implemented then TXs that are fraudulent will be processed in the sidechain which reduces the congestion but how exactly this is going to identify which one should be fraudulent or this assume just every TX is fraudulent and processes everything before it reaches the main network?

Sorry, if it's a lame question to ask but this much technical discussion is really not my thing (yet). Cheesy

BlackHatCoiner

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 7340

Farewell, Leo

Quote from: Findingnemo on June 08, 2024, 10:45:58 AM

So what's the possible solution other than increasing the block size which has be rejected by the community all the time when it's proposed and I am not going to say LN is the way either cause it's just a temporary solution

Scalability will emerge from sufficient transaction compression. This could mean to have multiple bidirectional channels within just one UTXO. To achieve this, we need to introduce a kind of script program called covenant. It requires a softfork, and softforks usually take a lot of time to activate and get sufficient support. These are the kind of L2 which cannot be implemented currently, i.e. Ark.

Findingnemo

hero member

Activity: 2366

Merit: 793

Bitcoin = Financial freedom

Quote from: BlackHatCoiner on June 08, 2024, 10:29:41 AM

Quote from: stompix on June 08, 2024, 06:26:05 AM

banks were crap in 2009, nowadays they are fast as hell even when it comes to interbanking transfers, they were also expensive yet they dropped the fees, while...eh, I feel like we're going backward.

A centralized network can scale vertically, easily. A decentralized network is very different. In Bitcoin, it's more like "we've taken a different path" rather than "we've stuck" or "we're going backwards".

I get both of your points, @stompix wants bitcoin to be as fast as possible so that it can compete with thousands of transactions every second where other payments system

But you want this to be highly decentralized even if it compromise anything including paying insane high fees.

So what's the possible solution other than increasing the block size which has be rejected by the community all the time when it's proposed and I am not going to say LN is the way either cause it's just a temporary solution but if we need something permanent then what could end up the fee problem of bitcoin network once and forever.

BlackHatCoiner

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 7340

Farewell, Leo

Quote from: stompix on June 08, 2024, 06:26:05 AM

banks were crap in 2009, nowadays they are fast as hell even when it comes to interbanking transfers, they were also expensive yet they dropped the fees, while...eh, I feel like we're going backward.

A centralized network can scale vertically, easily. A decentralized network is very different. In Bitcoin, it's more like "we've taken a different path" rather than "we've stuck" or "we're going backwards".

Quote from: stompix on June 08, 2024, 09:45:02 AM

So let's compare it with the most expensive and costliest system on the planet and ignore that its relative just 100 lines of codes different can do it for
Avg. Transaction Fee 0.275 DOGE ($0.04).
As I said, things evolve, and you can't evolve if your target is to beat the slowest guy, this is not like running from a bear!

I can't help but notice that you keep repeating the same argument about Dogecoin. Dogecoin does not have a hard cap. There will always be a subsidy, and therefore, transaction fees do not have to be high. In here it's different.

You're somehow expecting a network with a hard cap to have low transaction fees, and be completely dependent on-chain. That's only possible with gigabytes of block size, and the assumption that the demand for on-chain transactions will skyrocket accordingly, for if it won't, the system's days are numbered. In any other case, you can always argue that the system is not as cheap as custodial solutions.

stompix

legendary

Activity: 2912

Merit: 6403

Blackjack.fun

Quote from: bitmover on June 08, 2024, 08:50:58 AM

Don't you use bitcoin as a payment system in the forum? Doesn't it work for you?
You received money here at least once a week for the last 7-8 years without any problem. From people you don't know, from other countries, across border and basically for free (less than 1 usd fee most of time, rarely 2 usd).

What happens if it's not just me and you anymore and instead of a forum and a few exchanges those 13 million mentioned above try to buy a ticket each week with Bitcoin? Or are we going to always be a system that can only handle fewer people that eat at McDonalds in NY?

Quote from: bitmover on June 08, 2024, 08:50:58 AM

International transfers in bank costs much more than 1-2 usd and takes longer than 10 minutes. Much longer. Sometimes more than a weekday

So let's compare it with the most expensive and costliest system on the planet and ignore that its relative just 100 lines of codes different can do it for
Avg. Transaction Fee 0.275 DOGE ($0.04).
As I said, things evolve, and you can't evolve if your target is to beat the slowest guy, this is not like running from a bear!
I'm starting to believe we're going to see international payments instantly and at 5$ sooner than getting rid of this cursed mempool.

FeeBuddy

copper member

Activity: 322

Merit: 21

bc1qvq66kccea2fdqft6kss2zyn8y32z8xyy9rzhp0

fastestFee: 26 sat/vB
halfHourFee: 26 sat/vB
hourFee: 25 sat/vB
economyFee: 10 sat/vB
minimumFee: 5 sat/vB

bitmover

legendary

Activity: 2352

Merit: 6089

bitcoindata.science

Quote from: stompix on June 08, 2024, 06:26:05 AM

Quote from: bitmover on June 07, 2024, 03:09:35 PM

This doesn't mean that bitcoin can't be a good payment system.
We all here use it as a payment system. I use it as payment system for about 7 years.

13 millions Indians use the railway system each day and I have a feeling their reviews wouldn't be in the 5 stars ratings zone.
The problem is the same, things are evolving around at incredible speed and we're stuck in the same age, banks were crap in 2009, nowadays they are fast as hell even when it comes to interbanking transfers, they were also expensive yet they dropped the fees, while...eh, I feel like we're going backward.

Fees are just back to normal in less than a day. For 2 usd you can get into the next block

Don't you use bitcoin as a payment system in the forum? Doesn't it work for you?
You received money here at least once a week for the last 7-8 years without any problem. From people you don't know, from other countries, across border and basically for free (less than 1 usd fee most of time, rarely 2 usd).

International transfers in bank costs much more than 1-2 usd and takes longer than 10 minutes. Much longer. Sometimes more than a weekday

stompix

legendary

Activity: 2912

Merit: 6403

Blackjack.fun

Quote from: bitmover on June 07, 2024, 03:09:35 PM

This doesn't mean that bitcoin can't be a good payment system.
We all here use it as a payment system. I use it as payment system for about 7 years.

13 millions Indians use the railway system each day and I have a feeling their reviews wouldn't be in the 5 stars ratings zone.
The problem is the same, things are evolving around at incredible speed and we're stuck in the same age, banks were crap in 2009, nowadays they are fast as hell even when it comes to interbanking transfers, they were also expensive yet they dropped the fees, while...eh, I feel like we're going backward.

Quote from: 0t3p0t on June 07, 2024, 11:49:12 AM

I think Bitcoin will be the best asset to invest but not as money or payment.

It already is, it's money but money judged in % returns in $.

FeeBuddy

copper member

Activity: 322

Merit: 21

bc1qvq66kccea2fdqft6kss2zyn8y32z8xyy9rzhp0

fastestFee: 74 sat/vB
halfHourFee: 73 sat/vB
hourFee: 71 sat/vB
economyFee: 16 sat/vB
minimumFee: 8 sat/vB

FeeBuddy

copper member

Activity: 322

Merit: 21

bc1qvq66kccea2fdqft6kss2zyn8y32z8xyy9rzhp0

fastestFee: 291 sat/vB
halfHourFee: 287 sat/vB
hourFee: 282 sat/vB
economyFee: 26 sat/vB
minimumFee: 13 sat/vB

Ryu_Ar1

hero member

Activity: 910

Merit: 677

Quote from: 0t3p0t on June 07, 2024, 11:49:12 AM

This is I think the reason why sometimes Bitcoin is not ideal for payment purposes and something like this scenario would ruin Bitcoins purpose of existence as "an innovative payment network and a new kind of money" just because of this high fees as it does give inconvenience to those who will make important transactions. I think Bitcoin will be the best asset to invest but not as money or payment.

We've been through this before and indeed when the halving happened something like this also happened and the fact that they went back to normal within a few days is proof that it was temporary and I think for now it's still temporary and we just have to wait to see the gas go back to normal.

Today I was hampered in making transactions at first when halving I was quite surprised because I was the first time experiencing halving and fees were very crazy, but for now when I see this condition I am not too surprised anymore and I better wait until it is completely normal and then make transactions again as before because indeed forcing it now is quite risky because it is certain that the transfer fee will be much greater than what I sent Cheesy

bitmover

legendary

Activity: 2352

Merit: 6089

bitcoindata.science

Quote from: NotATether on June 07, 2024, 09:36:07 AM

Quote from: AHOYBRAUSE on June 07, 2024, 09:21:19 AM

I really don't understand what's going on with the mempool.
Every block that gets minds only contains like 200-500 transactions while 8 hours ago every block that got mined contained at least 2000-3000, often enough 4000-5000.

How can this be explained?

Large transactions take up move vbytes, and all blocks have a fixed limit of about 1 or 2 vMegabytes.

That's why there are fewer squares in the mempool.space googles, but they are much larger.

Just to add to NotATether answer, large transactions means transactions with more inputs and/or outputs.

Which means, from many UTXOs or to many addresses.

Each input/output is basically a new transaction in terms of costs/space in the block.

Quote from: 0t3p0t on June 07, 2024, 11:49:12 AM

This is I think the reason why sometimes Bitcoin is not ideal for payment purposes and something like this scenario would ruin Bitcoins purpose of existence as "an innovative payment network and a new kind of money" just because of this high fees as it does give inconvenience to those who will make important transactions. I think Bitcoin will be the best asset to invest but not as money or payment.

No. This is just temporary. It won't last more than a few days/weeks.

Fees will be back to normal again , as they always do.

If not , second layer solutions will come. This doesn't mean that bitcoin can't be a good payment system.

We all here use it as a payment system. I use it as payment system for about 7 years.

0t3p0t

sr. member

Activity: 1736

Merit: 357

Peace be with you!

This is I think the reason why sometimes Bitcoin is not ideal for payment purposes and something like this scenario would ruin Bitcoins purpose of existence as "an innovative payment network and a new kind of money" just because of this high fees as it does give inconvenience to those who will make important transactions. I think Bitcoin will be the best asset to invest but not as money or payment.

stompix

legendary

Activity: 2912

Merit: 6403

Blackjack.fun

Quote from: AHOYBRAUSE on June 07, 2024, 09:21:19 AM

I really don't understand what's going on with the mempool.
Every block that gets minds only contains like 200-500 transactions while 8 hours ago every block that got mined contained at least 2000-3000, often enough 4000-5000.

How can this be explained?

Size of each tx, visualized here:
https://mempool.space/block/000000000000000000021d9ee00781ceed1cd14295307ea4095afce1c5eba2e0
vs
https://mempool.space/block/00000000000000000001a3ee6221b7814c3d265fd806be4ec753c9a02e12d559

It's like playing tetris, a real sadist version of it Wink

Quote from: Findingnemo on June 07, 2024, 10:26:53 AM

It seems like every transaction that we find on the mempool confirmed blocks occupied by this address

bc1quhruqrghgcca950rvhtrg7cpd7u8k6svpzgzmrjy8xyukacl5lkq0r8l2d

All of those transactions are coming from 2 of 3 multi-sig wallets that increase the size of the transaction further.
But I wonder who decided to be so generous to the miners and consolidate inputs at higher fees?

OKx hot wallet, they are so generous because they charge dynamic fees on withdrawals. Wink

Findingnemo

hero member

Activity: 2366

Merit: 793

Bitcoin = Financial freedom

It seems like every transaction that we find on the mempool confirmed blocks occupied by this address

bc1quhruqrghgcca950rvhtrg7cpd7u8k6svpzgzmrjy8xyukacl5lkq0r8l2d

All of those transactions are coming from 2 of 3 multi-sig wallets that increase the size of the transaction further.

But I wonder who decided to be so generous to the miners and consolidate inputs at higher fees?

Current fees

NotATether

legendary

Activity: 1568

Merit: 6660

bitcoincleanup.com / bitmixlist.org

Quote from: AHOYBRAUSE on June 07, 2024, 09:21:19 AM

I really don't understand what's going on with the mempool.
Every block that gets minds only contains like 200-500 transactions while 8 hours ago every block that got mined contained at least 2000-3000, often enough 4000-5000.

How can this be explained?

Large transactions take up move vbytes, and all blocks have a fixed limit of about 1 or 2 vMegabytes.

That's why there are fewer squares in the mempool.space googles, but they are much larger.

Edit: It seems that those bastards are finished spamming the mempool. Unfortunately, the damage will take many hours to fix.

AHOYBRAUSE

hero member

Activity: 784

Merit: 881

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

I really don't understand what's going on with the mempool.
Every block that gets minds only contains like 200-500 transactions while 8 hours ago every block that got mined contained at least 2000-3000, often enough 4000-5000.

How can this be explained?

FeeBuddy

copper member

Activity: 322

Merit: 21

bc1qvq66kccea2fdqft6kss2zyn8y32z8xyy9rzhp0

fastestFee: 364 sat/vB
halfHourFee: 357 sat/vB
hourFee: 348 sat/vB
economyFee: 28 sat/vB
minimumFee: 14 sat/vB

stompix

legendary

Activity: 2912

Merit: 6403

Blackjack.fun

Quote from: bitmover on June 07, 2024, 06:22:19 AM

Who the hell is spending nearly 60 thousand dollars (16 * $3000)for consolidations? Huh

Hmm, hard to say without the id but my bet is on okx:
https://bitinfocharts.com/bitcoin/address/bc1quhruqrghgcca950rvhtrg7cpd7u8k6svpzgzmrjy8xyukacl5lkq0r8l2d
30vMB of tx over 30sat/vb, 5 hours of transactions just before the weekend, so there goes out chances of touching again under 10sat/vb.

Must be convenient to pay 4x times and still make money because you fleece customers on fees.

Topic: Mempool Observer Topic - page 32. (Read 20504 times)