I was told Bitcoin was going to die? 
It's died so many dozens of times now, clearly immortal lol. It's funny how the bankster trolls equate "raging success" with "dead"
Topic: transactions are not going or very slow (Read 2388 times)
It's died so many dozens of times now, clearly immortal lol. It's funny how the bankster trolls equate "raging success" with "dead"
Another manipulation attempt. The upload rate yesterday was higher then the average for my node as well. The backlog has cleared now and all 'reasonable' transactions should confirm very quickly:
I was told Bitcoin was going to die?
just started yesterday, several times to send the bitcoins to other addresses are not seem to be working well. used android bitcoin wallet and also greenaddress to send several times. most of them are not working or few of them happened very slow (had to wait overnight). Anyone else experiencing??
the only thing that i knew is, higher the transaction fees you provide the faster the confirmation you getfor your information the miner would prioritize the transaction with higher fee/kb first in order to maximize the use of their block space. I have no doubt if the transaction is longer, it must be the fee, make sure to set up your transaction fee's is same or higher than recommended
necessary skill
I wouldn't say things like that to these people, their entitlement to not thinking or learning knows no bounds.
The fastest and cheapest transaction fee is currently 90 satoshis/byte.
You should only pay the premium fee if you need your transaction confirmed as soon as possible. If you dont hurry, you can use lower fee.
The days when any transaction is included regardless of fees is over, so choosing the right fees based how quickly you need your transaction to be confirmed is necessary skill if you want to have good experience with sending Bitcoin.
I never have problem with sending bitcoin, they always delivery in 10-20 minutes
try to send with higher fee not with standard fee, the chance to more accepted is higher too
try to send with higher fee not with standard fee, the chance to more accepted is higher too
Except that the network conditions are highly degraded since 2 days ago (see charts in my link below)
I never have problem with sending bitcoin, they always delivery in 10-20 minutes
try to send with higher fee not with standard fee, the chance to more accepted is higher too
try to send with higher fee not with standard fee, the chance to more accepted is higher too
Just as Carlton wants it.
Nope, I couldn't affect the market rate for a Bitcoin transaction no matter how hard I tried. The price is set by the collective will of the market, not me. Remember, that concept "market", that you claim to support with your continuing attempts to spoil for a development team coup?
The fastest and cheapest transaction fee is currently 90 satoshis/byte.
For the median transaction size of 333 bytes, this results in a fee of 29,970 satoshis (0.19$).
https://bitcoinfees.21.co/
And rising by the hour.
Just as Carlton wants it.
Come July, when Blockstream/Core doesn't provide their half of the HK roundtable bargain... let's hope miners will take the initiative to plan a fork to greater capacity and leave you lot to tinker and central plan on your 1MB4EVA keccak altcoin.
Lol, the miners are not as stupid as you seem to think. The only holdout represents the 5% of the hashrate that isn't needed for the SegWit fork.
And "Come July"?
I seem to remember several other Doomsday deadlines have passed without the slightest possibility of success. You braying jackals have lost this battle multiple times already with your hilarious scare tactics, but you just don't want to stay on the ground, huh? SegWit left hook, incomingSo you're uninformed as well as deluded.
Since when was Antpool 5%?
Come July, when Blockstream/Core doesn't provide their half of the HK roundtable bargain... let's hope miners will take the initiative to plan a fork to greater capacity and leave you lot to tinker and central plan on your 1MB4EVA keccak altcoin.
Lol, the miners are not as stupid as you seem to think. The only holdout represents the 5% of the hashrate that isn't needed for the SegWit fork.
And "Come July"?
I seem to remember several other Doomsday deadlines have passed without the slightest possibility of success. You braying jackals have lost this battle multiple times already with your hilarious scare tactics, but you just don't want to stay on the ground, huh? SegWit left hook, incoming I am blaming the system, a system which can be changed.
A system which was specifically designed to be incorruptible and resistant to change. Nice perspective there.I have the fee set to 0.009BTC/kB in Electrum. I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that's a good amount.
I've just confirmed that something is not right there. I've sent mine today with: 0.000893 BTC/kB and it confirmed within the first block. I'm requesting a TX ID for the last time (else this is false). explain to us how Core this dynamic fee market is working
exactly the way it's supposed to, those who pay the most get to the front of the queue. Which part of economics 101 did you miss? Clearly the part where scarcity forming a part of valuation eluded you altogether.
Someone needs to create an actual BlockBeyondBelief altcoin, literally "Bitcoin" "Unlimited" as it's own coin. Then you morons can go use that trash, replete with it's dismal exchange rate value.
Scarce resources are valuable per unit. Abundant resources are not. Welcome to Reality.
Have any of you complainy-pants people come up with any good ideas (and remember I said "good")? No?
Well, the real achievers are actually doing the real work on the issue, and it takes time. Your idiot "duuuuuuuude" devs had their opportunity (they tried to take it way too early, lol), and spectacularly blew it.
Now, go talk to someone who's interested in stale "ideas" with zero merit, you've got some knots to undo from your delicate little panties.
Well, the real achievers are actually doing the real work on the issue, and it takes time. Your idiot "duuuuuuuude" devs had their opportunity (they tried to take it way too early, lol), and spectacularly blew it.
Now, go talk to someone who's interested in stale "ideas" with zero merit, you've got some knots to undo from your delicate little panties.
Here's an idea, not mine, admittedly:
Quote from: satoshi
It can be phased in, like:
if (blocknumber > 115000)
maxblocksize = largerlimit
if (blocknumber > 115000)
maxblocksize = largerlimit
The "real achievers" formed a company, drew in $76 million of investment from VC and legacy finance, awarded themselves stock options in said company, and now are tirelessly working to provide "solutions" for a problem they created. They make you sick and then offer to sell you the medicine for your disease.
Come July, when Blockstream/Core doesn't provide their half of the HK roundtable bargain... let's hope miners will take the initiative to plan a fork to greater capacity and leave you lot to tinker and central plan on your 1MB4EVA keccak altcoin.
I have the fee set to 0.009BTC/kB in Electrum. I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that's a good amount.
Yes this is good enough for now, but this queue size seems unusual enough to me...
The blocks are full, there's no denying it. There has to be bigger blocks, soon. I don't support how Gavin handled it though, but there has to be bigger blocks.
That solves nothing. That does not even improve scalability. All it does it give a bit more headroom which can easily get filled with the spam that someone is pushing onto the network.You may think you have paid the correct fee.
So if I think 1 cent is the right fee, don't blame me, blame the system? I'd not jump to conclusions without that TX ID.I am blaming the system, a system which can be changed. If we have to pay 20 cents per transaction, there would be no reason to use Bitcoin over Paypal, in the eyes of the average consumer.
I have the fee set to 0.009BTC/kB in Electrum. I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that's a good amount.
~6$ per Kilobyte of data? Are you sure that you did not forget a zero there? Please provide the transaction ID already or something is not right here. The blocks are full, there's no denying it. There has to be bigger blocks, soon. I don't support how Gavin handled it though, but there has to be bigger blocks.
Ok then, explain now why increasing the blocksize constant is the only way to increase the transaction rate. Make it credible, a multitude of Bitcoin development experts know full-well that this is an entirely false premise, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, as it's not impossible that you're the software design genius that's just about to announce a major design breakthrough to the world. Let's hear your idea to scale the transaction rate.
You explain to us how Core this dynamic fee market is working
I have the fee set to 0.009BTC/kB in Electrum. I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that's a good amount.
The blocks are full, there's no denying it. There has to be bigger blocks, soon. I don't support how Gavin handled it though, but there has to be bigger blocks.
That solves nothing. That does not even improve scalability. All it does it give a bit more headroom which can easily get filled with the spam that someone is pushing onto the network.You may think you have paid the correct fee.
So if I think 1 cent is the right fee, don't blame me, blame the system? I'd not jump to conclusions without that TX ID. Jump to: