WARNING! Bitcoin will soon block small transaction outputs - page 23.

muyuu

donator

Activity: 980

Merit: 1000

Quote from: SgtSpike on May 05, 2013, 06:15:07 PM

You have a point, but Bitcoin started with an understanding that 1 satoshi was the minimum. Now, we're being told that the limit is 5340 satoshis, with no free-market input on the matter. It's rather disappointing. Individuals should be able to decide what size of transaction is too small - we shouldn't all be forced to suddenly abide by the same arbitrary rule.

This change is temporary, and at current valuations it's not an issue.

I'd be more interested in finding out what the permanent solution will be. But there must be something because block size is a finite resource.

The alternative right now is to leave it with MIN_RELAY_TX_FEE=0.0005 BTC.

solex

legendary

Activity: 1078

Merit: 1006

100 satoshis -> ISO code

Quote from: SgtSpike on May 05, 2013, 06:15:07 PM

Quote from: lophie on May 05, 2013, 05:55:28 PM

Quote from: SgtSpike on May 05, 2013, 05:51:16 PM

Now, we will be regulated to only sending transactions of a certain size. No free market choice here...

Shame of them limiting the amount to one satoshi! it should be 1/100000 of a satoshi.....

What kind of argument is that? Roll Eyes

You have a point, but Bitcoin started with an understanding that 1 satoshi was the minimum. Now, we're being told that the limit is 5340 satoshis, with no free-market input on the matter. It's rather disappointing. Individuals should be able to decide what size of transaction is too small - we shouldn't all be forced to suddenly abide by the same arbitrary rule.

5340 satoshis is negligible, less than a US or Euro cent, and a very sensible minimum. This cutoff is a needed arbitrary rule which mirrors the real-world where fiat sub-cent transactions are also unwelcome. The 5340 will be reduced as BTC value increases.

This whole thread is a fuss about a benefit interpreted wrongly.

The Achilles Heel of Bitcoin is being swamped by transactions worth less than a cent because, unlike fiat coinage transactions, Bitcoin transactions are stored on thousands of servers for years or forever.

lophie

hero member

Activity: 924

Merit: 1001

Unlimited Free Crypto

Quote from: SgtSpike on May 05, 2013, 06:15:07 PM

You have a point, but Bitcoin started with an understanding that 1 satoshi was the minimum. Now, we're being told that the limit is 5340 satoshis, with no free-market input on the matter. It's rather disappointing. Individuals should be able to decide what size of transaction is too small - we shouldn't all be forced to suddenly abide by the same arbitrary rule.

Last time I checked Bitcoin was opensource, The client and the protocol. Did Gavin changed that as well? Grin

Look IMO your problem is that you still confuse Bitcoin with other alternatives having a central authority. Bitcoin transactions don't magically happen, All nodes participate, Those nodes have challenges to overcome and some of them are common ones. This is a "suggestion" on how to overcome a certain one of them.

Look at the recent unfortunate fork event. Wasn't the devs utterly helpless at "applying" the solution? It most be adopted/executed by the network in order to work. So they "suggested" the solution. They provided rationale for it, People liked it, People saved the day.

radiumsoup

sr. member

Activity: 356

Merit: 255

Quote from: bitcoiners on May 05, 2013, 04:41:53 PM

Um, transaction size is not a bug.

This summary just decided the issue for me, and I am now opposed to this method of battling bloat. Thanks for the extremely elegant explanation Cheesy

SgtSpike

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1005

Quote from: lophie on May 05, 2013, 05:55:28 PM

Quote from: SgtSpike on May 05, 2013, 05:51:16 PM

Now, we will be regulated to only sending transactions of a certain size. No free market choice here...

Shame of them limiting the amount to one satoshi! it should be 1/100000 of a satoshi.....

What kind of argument is that? Roll Eyes

You have a point, but Bitcoin started with an understanding that 1 satoshi was the minimum. Now, we're being told that the limit is 5340 satoshis, with no free-market input on the matter. It's rather disappointing. Individuals should be able to decide what size of transaction is too small - we shouldn't all be forced to suddenly abide by the same arbitrary rule.

Quote from: gmaxwell on May 05, 2013, 05:57:52 PM

Quote from: SgtSpike on May 05, 2013, 05:51:16 PM

This is a terrible idea, IMO. Miners and full nodes should be able to decide which transactions to relay and include in blocks, and which transactions to not. An option to set a minimum amount per output or transaction should be built in to the client. So miners, if they believe transactions below a certain size to be dust, should set the option to not propagate transactions below that certain size.

Uh. You realize your "should" are describing the change here, right?

Yes, but there is no choice in the matter (as far as I am aware). Will there be an option where I can set what transaction amounts I wish to propogate and what transaction amounts I wish to block?

Quote from: muyuu on May 05, 2013, 06:10:40 PM

Quote from: SgtSpike on May 05, 2013, 05:51:16 PM

This is a terrible idea, IMO. Miners and full nodes should be able to decide which transactions to relay and include in blocks, and which transactions to not. An option to set a minimum amount per output or transaction should be built in to the client. So miners, if they believe transactions below a certain size to be dust, should set the option to not propagate transactions below that certain size. In this way, the free market would choose an appropriate minimum transaction size, as people could be waiting for days or weeks for their transactions to propagate the network and/or be included in a block if they are too small.

I can see all sorts of unintended consequences coming out of this. This is a fundamental change of Bitcoin, and really seems to go against the idea of freedom of financial transactions. Now, we will be regulated to only sending transactions of a certain size. No free market choice here...

Bleh.

Miners decide whether they include this patch or not. Same as in all Bitcoin forks.

Including transactions is voluntary in all forks that I know of.

True, but then those miners will receive no future updates. If 0.8.2 and onward include this patch, then those who disagree with the patch will be forever left on 0.8.1.

Littleshop

legendary

Activity: 1386

Merit: 1004

Quote from: ?? on ??

May be a small amount, but this will shut down small businesses for sure, this is horrible news.

Like someone said further up, bitcoin is becoming what they try to stop.

Name one other then gambling? I am not really for this change, but I don't think this is going to shut anyone down. Someone may need to change though.

muyuu

donator

Activity: 980

Merit: 1000

Quote from: SgtSpike on May 05, 2013, 05:51:16 PM

This is a terrible idea, IMO. Miners and full nodes should be able to decide which transactions to relay and include in blocks, and which transactions to not. An option to set a minimum amount per output or transaction should be built in to the client. So miners, if they believe transactions below a certain size to be dust, should set the option to not propagate transactions below that certain size. In this way, the free market would choose an appropriate minimum transaction size, as people could be waiting for days or weeks for their transactions to propagate the network and/or be included in a block if they are too small.

I can see all sorts of unintended consequences coming out of this. This is a fundamental change of Bitcoin, and really seems to go against the idea of freedom of financial transactions. Now, we will be regulated to only sending transactions of a certain size. No free market choice here...

Bleh.

Miners decide whether they include this patch or not. Same as in all Bitcoin forks.

Including transactions is voluntary in all forks that I know of.

starik69

legendary

Activity: 1367

Merit: 1000

WTF?

Quote

Bitcoin is not appropriate for transactions less than a penny or three.

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/2577#issuecomment-17141937

muyuu

donator

Activity: 980

Merit: 1000

Quote from: misterbigg on May 05, 2013, 03:32:22 PM

Quote from: ?? on ??

Bitcoin is not suitable for micro transactions.

Stop misusing the word. "microtransactions" are on the order of pennies, or tens of pennies. Perhaps almost a dollar. Bitcoin already supports these, although it could get prohibitively expensive as transaction volume goes up.

These are nanotransactions or picotransactions. It makes no sense for Bitcoin to support transactions worth hundredths of a penny.

Value in pennies depends on BTC valuation.

Miners should be sorting the transactions they include by fee/byte. They can already do that if they want to.

If you solo-mine then just don't include this patch. Or rally so it's not included in your pool's bitcoind.

myself

legendary

Activity: 938

Merit: 1000

chaos is fun...…damental :)

Quote from: lucif on May 05, 2013, 02:01:53 PM

This is Satoshi critics to existing system Bitcoin should be opposite to. They breaking the Bible.

Quote

Completely non-reversible transactions are not really possible, since financial institutions cannot avoid mediating disputes. The cost of mediation increases transaction costs, limiting the minimum practical transaction size and cutting off the possibility for small casual transactions, and there is a broader cost in the loss of ability to make non-reversible payments for non-reversible services.

From one patch to another, Bitcoin becomes what they try to get rid off.

litecoins

gmaxwell

staff

Activity: 4284

Merit: 8808

Quote from: SgtSpike on May 05, 2013, 05:51:16 PM

This is a terrible idea, IMO. Miners and full nodes should be able to decide which transactions to relay and include in blocks, and which transactions to not. An option to set a minimum amount per output or transaction should be built in to the client. So miners, if they believe transactions below a certain size to be dust, should set the option to not propagate transactions below that certain size.

Uh. You realize your "should" are describing the change here, right?

lophie

hero member

Activity: 924

Merit: 1001

Unlimited Free Crypto

Quote from: SgtSpike on May 05, 2013, 05:51:16 PM

Now, we will be regulated to only sending transactions of a certain size. No free market choice here...

Shame of them limiting the amount to one satoshi! it should be 1/100000 of a satoshi.....

What kind of argument is that? Roll Eyes

bitcoiners

sr. member

Activity: 322

Merit: 250

Quote from: SgtSpike on May 05, 2013, 05:51:16 PM

This is a fundamental change of Bitcoin, and really seems to go against the idea of freedom of financial transactions. Now, we will be regulated to only sending transactions of a certain size. No free market choice here...

Bleh.

This

SgtSpike

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1005

This is a terrible idea, IMO. Miners and full nodes should be able to decide which transactions to relay and include in blocks, and which transactions to not. An option to set a minimum amount per output or transaction should be built in to the client. So miners, if they believe transactions below a certain size to be dust, should set the option to not propagate transactions below that certain size. In this way, the free market would choose an appropriate minimum transaction size, as people could be waiting for days or weeks for their transactions to propagate the network and/or be included in a block if they are too small.

I can see all sorts of unintended consequences coming out of this. This is a fundamental change of Bitcoin, and really seems to go against the idea of freedom of financial transactions. Now, we will be regulated to only sending transactions of a certain size. No free market choice here...

Bleh.

wolverine.ks

sr. member

Activity: 375

Merit: 250

so what would happen if i wanted to send less than the minimum, and then attached a 100btc fee/bid on top of that?

lophie

hero member

Activity: 924

Merit: 1001

Unlimited Free Crypto

Quote from: Ichthyo on May 05, 2013, 05:39:54 PM

Quote from: arklan on May 05, 2013, 05:27:35 PM

i've never understood why there needs to be rules prohibiting these transactions. just enforce appropriate fees. "oh, you wanna send a satoshi? well ok... but the fee for that is MORE then a satoshi, so, you know. proceed at your own risk."

doesn't block transactions, but makes them much, much less likely to occur.

but didn't you understand that this patch is intended to be the first step on a roadmap to achieve exactly that goal?
Next step would be to determine that relay limit dynamically, based on what is currently successfully being included into the blockchain.

+1

alyssa85

legendary

Activity: 1652

Merit: 1088

CryptoTalk.Org - Get Paid for every Post!

How does this affect getting change? Say I want to send an amount, but I don't have the exact amount in my wallet, I have a bit more -so it does two outputs, one to the address of the recipient, and another output to one of my addresses with the change. If the change is below this new threshold I no longer get it back?

Ichthyo

hero member

Activity: 602

Merit: 500

Quote from: arklan on May 05, 2013, 05:27:35 PM

i've never understood why there needs to be rules prohibiting these transactions. just enforce appropriate fees. "oh, you wanna send a satoshi? well ok... but the fee for that is MORE then a satoshi, so, you know. proceed at your own risk."

doesn't block transactions, but makes them much, much less likely to occur.

but didn't you understand that this patch is intended to be the first step on a roadmap to achieve exactly that goal?
Next step would be to determine that relay limit dynamically, based on what is currently successfully being included into the blockchain.

Birdy

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 250

Quote from: lophie on May 05, 2013, 05:34:07 PM

No. For example in sendmany you could send to five different addresses, Each one is considered an output.

Hey this stirred another question in my head. What about the "change" output. Can it be less than 54uBTC? What is it tagged differently than other outputs?

Got the same question, if this also considers the change that could be awful.

bitcoiners

sr. member

Activity: 322

Merit: 250

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: bitcoiners on May 05, 2013, 05:27:59 PM

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: bitcoiners on May 05, 2013, 05:21:38 PM

Quote from: ?? on ??

Most people who posted in this thread are utterly clueless about the subject of conversation. Go fork yourself a cluelesscoin or something.

Lol, says the guy that told people to buy above $200 before the crash and then is commenting on cluelessness. You even asked if the crash was over and it crashed again down to $50. You have no idea what you are saying. End of story.

ROFL. You have just proven my point.

What that you are an idiot?

Too bad that you take an objective observation as an ad hominem attack and respond with an utterly clueless ad hominem attack of your own. Only confirming what I have said, at least as related to yourself.

Blah, blah, blah. You were wrong before and you are wrong now.

Topic: WARNING! Bitcoin will soon block small transaction outputs - page 23. (Read 58538 times)