Topic: Mempool Observer Topic - page 44. (Read 23903 times)

Frankly, I don't care. If I see something wrong, I'll speak up. End of story.

The average transactions per second is not equivalent to the capacity. Capacity is the maximum transactions it can handle per second, and it's more than 65,000, just google "visa transaction capacity".

And you're both missing the point. Visa can increase its capacity if there is a need for more than 65,000 transactions per second because it is a single, centralized system. Decentralized systems do not function this way. This is intended to be a "peer-to-peer cash system", remember? Clients must verify everything.

Beyond that, let's not repeat the same arguments about the burden of running a node. I'm focusing on the economic aspect of small block sizes. If you want to compete with Visa, you need gigabytes of block size. If you recognize the sustainability issues that arise from "scaling" to gigabytes of block size, you need to stop comparing it with Visa and find another way to scale the system.

Wrong. You can create transactions that have arbitrary data. It's nowadays called "spam".

So, is 80 MB the ideal size? Or should it double with every halving? I can't keep up with the changing goalposts!

---

Try taking a shot every time we've made this conversation and you've made your Friday night.

     

• fastestFee: 42 sat/vB
• halfHourFee: 38 sat/vB
• hourFee: 34 sat/vB
• economyFee: 18 sat/vB
• minimumFee: 9 sat/vB

Look what you made me do, I merited Franky1...how are you going to compensate for this?
https://annualreport.visa.com/financials/default.aspx
So Visa does only 582 million on average so you're off by a factor of ten, and then you complain this is too much, this is that and impossible and everything! How about we stop with approximation and talk about real numbers, proven numbers?



But if there are no 100 million transactions there will be no 1000Petablocks either, right?? 
Also, seems like you fail to understand we need only 20x the amount of transactions at exactly 1 sat/vb to compensate for the block having on average 20sat/vb, and again, if you think we can't have 10 million (funny how again you're off by an order of magnitude) tx in a day 12 years from now then you don't need a crystal ball to recognize a failure.

 

     

• fastestFee: 31 sat/vB
• halfHourFee: 29 sat/vB
• hourFee: 27 sat/vB
• economyFee: 14 sat/vB
• minimumFee: 7 sat/vB

25 sat/vB, 26 sat/vB, 27 sat/vB are the minimum medium and maximum Mempool at the moment. This process of transaction free changes every time. The current state may be increased or decreased after a few hours. But a few days ago when I donated some amount of btc to the ambulance campaign, after a few days the bitcoin transactions were very low. 
Max Mempool was like 9 sat/vB. But the current situation is not an unusual situation because it may cost five to seven dollars worth of bitcoins to trade bitcoins from this situation.

     

• fastestFee: 23 sat/vB
• halfHourFee: 22 sat/vB
• hourFee: 22 sat/vB
• economyFee: 8 sat/vB
• minimumFee: 4 sat/vB

LN creates its own currency and is a different network. LN can even function without any references to bitcoin utxos..
grow up and learn that bitcoin never leaves the bitcoin network and realise any other network pretending to be bitcoin is the lie

as for your cult mentor taking words of satoshi and twisting it to then then form your mentors scripts.. ill just laugh at the failure. and ill laugh at your attempts to even dare try to say your motives are based on satoshis words. because you have no clue about what was actually said nor how it applies to the reality of bitcoin today

as for you wanting bitcoin to scale.. YOU DONT! ... you just follow a cult of stupidity that does not understand how bitcoin works but wants people to stop using bitcoin to then be moved to another network. you do this by using extreme LEAPING statements of irrational numbers to then speak ofreasons bitcoin should not scale and instead people should use another networl that lies about its promises of its functions and lies by pretending to be bitcoin

oh and visa does not do 65,000tx a second.. and 65k tx is not even close to 100m tx per 10min... DO THE MATH not even visa does 100m per 10 min(~1 blocktime)..

here is more of a rational stat
720m a day /24 = 30m an hour
30m an hour /6 = 5mill per block
5m /600 = 8,333 per second

and thats not based on one network of one data set..(quote: general purpose cards((plural) meaning of different systems))
Visa has multiple networks handling multiple currencies(£$Є¥₴) and also multiple systems (debit and credit)
in short the visa stat of 266billion purchases worldwide using the multiple currencies and networks and systems under brand of visa, is like saying cryptocurrency does X transactions per sec/hour/day/year.. its not comparable to bitcoin alone

so you are comparing an orange to a whole vineyard farm
so you are also suggesting people should not enjoy using an orange nor should an orange even try to grow and instead use grapes that pretend to be an orange

I'm using numbers close to what Satoshi envisioned: https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg09964.html.

1.4 billion transactions per day is pretty reasonable guess for the global reserve currency. Visa processes around 65,000 transactions per second. That's more than 5.6 billion per day, and that's Visa alone.

I want from Bitcoin to be able to scale to those numbers through the development of L2 solutions. You want it to not be able to even achieve a small fraction of what Visa achieves. Who wants the best for Bitcoin?

Edit: Sorry, I forgot I was talking to the person who thinks LN isn't Bitcoin.

again you are using extremes of irrationalness
100m transactions.. again you stupidly are implying gb blocks and 1.4billion tx a day in some non-sense fantasy of one world currency of everyone using bitcoin and no other fiat or crypto exists
wake up to the real world.. no one wants a one world currency
try real world scenarios

Mempool is experiencing disruptions and we are unable to control or prevent this abuse due to our ineffective community.

Someone here is getting funded by someone or some other. Still, you both are using AI to verify your outcome and banking that were trying to create something useful as in tutorials using AI or something that can lead to a scam.

Have any of you tried it, or are you guys old enough to know that it is useless now? I do not support them, but I think they make a hell of a tutorial, and in the coming months, Google searches will become irrelevant.


This is a test if you guys can find my post to be AI-generated. Please try!!

Correct. If 1000 median transactions currently pay 1 BTC in fees, then each pays 100,000 sats. The miner would be equally satisfied if 10000 median transactions each paid 10,000 sats, or if 100M transactions each paid 1 sat.

The problem is that you can't be certain there will be 100 million transactions in each block. If you're wrong, you cannot be held accountable. If there aren't 100 million transactions every 10 minutes, then you're off and your system is not sustainable over the long term.

If the block size is 4 MB, then there is fee market competition, because there are more than 4 MB in total data broadcasted every 10 minutes on average. If you rise the block size to 1 GB, then you kill this competition, and now transactions can pay as little as 1 sat each. (Assuming the mempool's size is less than the block size limit)

Killing the competition is the equivalent of killing the miner's income from collecting transaction fees, which is directly related with the hashrate.

not true, fee market competition in the cults mind is "pay more", however more transactions per block can cover any extra costs in total without costing individuals more
 
also mining hashrate has NO relation to block size.. no matter the block size, an asic performs difficulty rounds of hashs of the same length of block header hash no matter the block size

so how dare you even act like an idiot to even suggest more transactions costs asics hashing to cost more.. you have been in the bitcoin community for enough years to know better than the cult crap you copy

escape the cult narrative and run some actual scenarios, for yourself, to learn how things work.. stop just reciting cultish scripts thats make you look stupid

and lastly
when you want to abuse the "latency" argument, most nodes pre validate and add to mempool transactions and all they need is a blockheader and merkle tree. they dont need to be provided with a full block of all tx data when a block is confirmed by a mining pool
now please go do your research

this topic alone teaches you that nodes have no issue holding onto 300mb of transactions ready to compare to a blockheader+merkletree
so please i dare you to learn how bitcoin works

     

• fastestFee: 34 sat/vB
• halfHourFee: 33 sat/vB
• hourFee: 31 sat/vB
• economyFee: 12 sat/vB
• minimumFee: 6 sat/vB

The fact that you think the small block size is solely a matter of technical obstacles proves my point. It isn't just a matter of bandwidth, latency and throughput. It's an economic problem. Bitcoin relies on transaction fees, not on subsidies. Therefore, there has to be fee market competition, or else you're risking with the long-term security.

If you rise the block size by a factor of x, then you should expect that the on-chain volume will rise accordingly, otherwise you're off.

Which proposal did you read?

What a funny graph, because of that rate madness that occurred 2 days ago.  

     

• fastestFee: 63 sat/vB
• halfHourFee: 55 sat/vB
• hourFee: 46 sat/vB
• economyFee: 10 sat/vB
• minimumFee: 5 sat/vB

     

• fastestFee: 28 sat/vB
• halfHourFee: 28 sat/vB
• hourFee: 27 sat/vB
• economyFee: 12 sat/vB
• minimumFee: 6 sat/vB

This whole block size debate will never die... just like the Christian calendar debate which created a schism long time ago!

Bitcoin never promised to fix human nature issues.

where in the insanity of your cultish scripts did you get the assertion of "gigabyte blocks"(plural)

lets say 2.26gigabytes... just for fun
2,260,000,000bytes
a lean tx of 226byte=10million tx/block
=60m tx an hour
=1.44billion tx a day

you are assuming bitcoin to be used for everyone on the planet to do a transaction once every 5 days(everyone(8bill): even the infirm and toddlers)
however
most people do not receive income 6 times a month. they receive income once a month
most people dont pay their bills 6 times a month
most people of the world dont get paid in in the same currency as each other

people around the world do not use nor want a situation of a "one world currency"
so if you think everyone is going to converge and only use one currency for all main payments.. you are wrong

you are using foolish extremities of a fantasy situation that will never happen
the world will not become a "one world currency" and also to note bitcoin wont be it

now can you stop using doomads scripts of rejecting onchain scaling with his "gigabyte block" buzzword scripts of what he foolishly taught you to repeat without thinking or calculating or running scenarios if it would even reach that level in the reality of the real world


in short there has never in the history of civilised humanity been any case of any currency or payment system that does 1.4billion payments a day

also last note.
be aware that if you want to continue with your cult scripts... be aware we do not live in the 19th century.. its now 2024 where internet service providers are currently expanding internet speeds to reach above 1gb/s.. so go play with running realistic scenarios based on real world possibilities.. NOT fantasy scenarios NOT based on real world possibilities

“Facts are stubborn things, but statistics are pliable.” -- Mark Twain